School Survey of Type Counties 


OF 


West Virginia 


Report Made 
by 

L. V. CAVINS 


Survey Made 
by the 

STATE DEPARTMENT OF RURAL SCHOOLS, NORMAL 
SCHOOLS, COLLEGES, AND UNIVERSITY 


Published by 

STATE DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOLS 
Charleston, West Virginia 





























School Survey of Type Counties 

OF 

West Virginia 


Report Made 



L/vy CAVINS 


Survey Made 
by the 

STATE DEPARTMENT OF RURAL SCHOOLS, NORMAL 
SCHOOLS, COLLEGES, AND UNIVERSITY 


Published by 

STATE DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOLS 
Charleston, West Virginia 














L/\3f£ 

.da 


( 



JARHETT PRINTING COMPANY 


LIBRAS OF CONGF-s 
^' !V£D 

POCU ME> i s DIVISION 





FOREWORD 


It is with pleasure that I present to the school superintendents, teachers, 
and others interested in education within our state, the first attempt made to 
discover by actual experimentation the condition of matters in the educa¬ 
tional life of the state. This report prepared by Professor L. V. Cavins of 
the West Virginia University under the general direction of Mr. J. D. Mul- 
doon, Supervisor of Rural Schools of the State Department of Education, 
presents some very interesting and valuable data which should become the 
possession of all progressive school folk. 

I take it that the results are not absolutely final but they should stimulate 
all to a further inquiry into the matters discussed so well in this report. I am 

Very respectfully yours, 

George M. Ford. 

January 10, 1923. 

Charleston, West Virginia. 







INTRODUCTION 


It is little more than a decade since the school survey movement began. 
The progress of the movement was interrupted by the War, but in spite of 
the three years during which very little was undertaken, there are now some 
thirty major surveys and a long list of minor surveys. 

There are two characteristics which distinguish the earlier surveys from 
those which came after 1915. The earlier surveys were largely descriptive 
accounts of what some experienced observer had seen. To these descriptive 
accounts the surveyor adjled a few personal recommendations as a guide to 
improvement. The early surveys, were first, observational, and, secondly, 
personal. 

As the survey movement went forward, test and exact records increasingly 
replaced mere observation. The later surveys are also the products of co¬ 
operative work rather than individual undertakings. The later surveys are, 
first, quantitative and exact and, secondly, objective and standardized. 

If the West Virginia survey had no other virtue, it would have served a 
very useful purpose in training a great many people in the use of the instru¬ 
ments for exact evaluation of school work which have been evolved by the 
school survey. 

There will doubtless be other benefits also from this work. The relation 
of achievement to intelligence, the proper grading of pupils, the treatment 
of individual pupils in the light of the expectations justified by comparison 
'with others of like age, will become living issues in all the counties and the 
schools will profit by the careful study which will be made of these matters. 

Above all, the survey will overcome in large measure that isolation which 
is one of the chief evils of the one-room rural school. Supervision is what 
the rural schools sorely need as the survey so vividly points out. If super¬ 
vision is to be effective, however, it must be backed by an intelligent use of 
the standards which a survey’ like the present sets up. Teachers must learn 
to supervise themselves by a study of the results obtained with their pupils 
and through a constant comparison of these results with the standards for 
similar classes elsewhere. 

It'is to be hoped, as Professor Cavins suggests, that this work will be carried 
on. Surveys of school work ought to become commonplace. The County and 
the State ought to set up agencies which will make it possible to do every year 
the kind of work which is here represented. The survey movement will then 
have reached its natural consummation and will become a part of every 
educational officer’s routine work rather than the purely personal observational 
undertaking which it was in its original stages. 


Chas. H. Judd. 

























































TABLE OF CONTENTS 


Foreword ... : .;.. 3 

Introduction ...’. 5 

List of Tables ... 9 

List of Diagrams . 10 

Survey Staff ...’. 11 

Chapter 

I. PLAN OF SURVEY ..... 13 

Counties and directors .*..... 13 

Training of assistants ... 14 

Giving the tests . . ... 14 

A suggestive schedule for testing a rural school. 15 

Steps in handling the test material . 16 


Chapter 


II. CLASSIFICATION OF PUPILS . 18 

Age-Grade Table . 18 

Cost of teaching and reteaching ... 19 

Progress distribution curve . 21 

Study of classification by means of standard deviation 

curve ... 22 

Causes of retardation ..... 23 

Mental Age-Grade Table ....:.. 24 

Comparative age study . 25 

Analysis by counties . l. 25 


Chapter 

III. A STUDY OF EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT AS INDI¬ 


CATED BY CENTRAL TENDENCIES . 27 

Tests and Scales Used .*. 27 

Arithmetic . 27 

Reading ...... 29 

Handwriting . 30 

Spelling . 32 

Summary of Educational Tests . 34 

State and standard medians . 34 

Achievement age explained . 34 

Comparison of county achievement . 36 

Comparison of achievement quotient . 37 

Summary of county and state medians . 38 



































Chapter 


IV. STUDY OF CLASS INSTRUCTION BY MEANS OF MEAS¬ 
URES OF VARIABILITY ...:. 40 

The meaning of standard deviation .. 40 

Superimposing a theoretical standard deviation curve upon 

an actual S. D...... 40 

Study of variability in ages by curves . 42 

Study of variability in subjects by curves ... 44 

Chapter 

V. STUDIES IN CORRELATIONS . 46 

Intelligence and school subjects ... 47 

School subjects with one another . 48 

Tenure of teachers and achievement . 48 

School buildings and achievement . >. . 48 

Chapter 

VI. DELIVERY OF THE SURVEY . 50 

Methods of Delivering the Survey in Coal District. 52 

Public meeting . 52 

Meeting teachers and principals . 52 

Basis of reclassification . 52 

The result of the promotions . 56 

Chapter 

VII. STUDY OF RURAL AND CITY SCHOOLS . 58 

Comparison of medians by subjects . 59 

Shouse’s study of one, two, and three room schools. 60 

Comparison of variability in subjects . 62 

Chapter 

VIII. EFFECT OF SUPERVISION .. 63 


Comparison of classification methods for the two groups.... 65 
The value of supervision ... 66 


Appendix: 

Forms used in constructiong survey. 

























LIST OF TABLES 


Table 

I. Age-Grade Table—-State Survey, 1922. 18 

II. Cost of teaching and retaching—State Survey, 1922. 19 

III. Mental Age-Grade Table . 24 

IV. Comparative Age Study . 25 

V. Comparison of Mental and Chronological Ages by Counties.... 25 

VI. Arithmetic . 28 

VII. Rate of Reading . 29 

VIII. Comprehension of Reading . 29 

IX. Speed in Handwriting (letters per minute) . 31 

X. Quality of Handwriting (Ayre’s' Scale) . 31 

XI. Spelling . 33 

XII. Showing Standard and State Medians . 34 

XIII. Comparison of County and State Medians . 38 

XIV. Comparison of Mental and Achievement Ages by Grades.... 39 

XV. Showing Correlation of Intelligence ...,.. 47 

XVI. Showing the Coefficient of Correlation Between the Different 


KjLIIUUI k) UUJCv/tiu — -- --..........--*.. ................. _. . *xO 

XVII. Comparison of One, Two, and Three-teacher Schools (After 

Shouse) ..... 60 

XVIII. Showing a Comparison of the Average Standard Deviation 

of Rural and City Schools .. 62 

XIX. Showing the Variability of Suprvised and Non-supervised 

Groups .*. 66 



















LIST OF DIAGRAMS 


Map Showing Location of Counties 

Diagram 

1. Showing Ideal and Actual Progress Distribution .X— 21 

2. Showing the Standard Deviation Range of Middle-two-thirds 22 

3. Showing comparison of West Virginia Scores with Standards 26 

4. Showing the Comparison of State and Standard Scores in 

Arithmetic ... 28 

5. Showing the Comparison of State and Standard Scores in 

Reading . 29 

6. Showing the Comparison of State and Standard Scores in 

Speed of Handwriting .31 

7. Showing the Comparison of State and Standard Scores in 

Quality of Handwriting ........ 31 

8. Showing the Comparison of State and Standard Scores in 

Spelling . 33 

9. Showing the Achievement Scores of Ten Counties . 36 

10. Achievement Quotients of Eight Counties . 37 

11. Showing Theorotically Variability of Chronological and Mental 

Ages Superimposed Upon an Actual Variability . 42 

12. Showing Theorotical Variability of Subjects Superimposed 

Upon an Actual Variability . 44 

13. Showing Comparison by Subjects of Rural and City Schools.... 59 

14. Showing the Comparison of Supervised and Non-supervised 

Groups . 63 

15. Showing Coefficient of Variability of 6th Grade . 65 













SURVEY STAFF 


Chairman of Survey: 

J. D. Muldoon, State Supervisor of Rural Education 
State Director: 

L. V. Cavins, Professor of Education, West Virginia University 
County Directors: 

S. O. Bond, President of Salem College 

C. M. Koon, Professor of Education, West Liberty Normal School 

R. Ray Scott, Professor of Education, West Virginia Wesleyan College 

J. B. Shouse, Professor of Education. Marshall College 

Mr. and Mrs. Oliver Shurtleff, Sutton Public School 

H. G. Wheat, Professor of Education, Glenville Normal School 

F. S. White, Professor of Education, Fairmont Normal School 

W. H. S. White, President of Shepherdstown Normal School 

L. E. Vanderzalm, Professor of Education, Concord Normal School 



DEPARTMENT of EDUCATION 

♦ 

WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY 


12 


West Virginia 


4 



MONONCA 










CHAPTER 1 


Plan of Survey 


♦ 

The survey of the type counties of West Virginia was instituted by J. D. 
Muldoon, State Supervisor of Rural Education. In response to an invita¬ 
tion by Mr. Muldoon, representatives from the various normal schools, 
colleges, and the University, met at Huntington, West Virginia, November 
3 and 4, 1921, to discuss the matter of a school survey. At this meeting each 
of the various Educational institutions decided to take a county more or less 
conveniently located and make such a study of its educational progress as the 
various committees might decide was advisable. After hearing the report of 
these committees, the staff decided upon the following items: 


1 . 


Counties and Directors: 
Harrison (Coal District) 

Wetzel. 

Brooke. 

Upshur. 

Logan. 

Braxton. 

Gilmer. 

Marion. 

Berkeley. 

Monroe. 


.L. V. Cavins 

.S. 0. Bond 

.C. M. Koon 

.R. Ray Scott 

.J. B. Shouse 

Mr. and Mrs. Oliver Shurtleff 

.H. G. Wheat 

.F. S. White 

.W. H. S. White 

.L. E. Vanderzalm 


The above counties were chosen chiefly because they were accessible to 
the various institutions charged with the work of surveying them. It may 
seem from the accompanying map that they, are fairly well distributed and 
as such may be regarded as fairly typical of the entire state. 

2. That the survey in each county, except Coal District of Harrison County* 
shall include 20 per cent of all schools for white children that are under the 
educational supervision of the county superintendent, said schools to be 
selected at random (the first, sixth, and eleventh, etc., schools when grouped 
by sub-district, and by name, or number); that inaccessible schools, not to 
exceed one-fourth of the number so selected, may be dropped from the list 
and others substituted in their stead, or not, at the discretion of the member 
of the staff who conducts the survey in said county; that the efforts of each 
member of the staff shall be to select a representative group that shall include 
not fewer than 15 per cent of all of the schools nor more than 20 per cent 
of all of the schools for white children in the county. 

3. That the survey shall include grades third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh 
and eighth. 

4. That the following tests and scales shall be used in conducting the 
survey. 












14 


West Virginia 


I. Illinois Examination I and II. 

1. General Intelligence. 

2. Silent Reading. 

3. Arithmetic. 

II. Gettysburg Edition of the Ayres Handwriting Scale. 

III. Buckingham Extension of the Ayres Spelling Scale. 

5. That the administration of the tests shall be subject to the discretion 
of the county director, after the Committee on Forms and the report of the 
secretary have been complied with. 

Training of Assistants 

Considering the number of schools to be tested in each county and the 
number of tests to be given, the magnitude of the work was clearly beyond 
the efforts of a single instructor, consequently the various directors used the 
members of the classes in Test and Measurement in carrying on the work. 
Perhaps the chief value of the survey lies in the great amount of practical 
training that the work afforded these students in the normal schools, colleges, 
and the University. 

Although there was considerable variation in the methods pursued by the 
various county directors, the writer kept closely enough in touch with the 
various final county reports with sufficient pains to believe that the work 
was done in a very careful way. In every case the various directors spent 
much time in selecting the most capable students for this work, and in training 
them by observation and by preliminary testing to give the tests, score the 
papers, and make the necessary computations. 

Giving the Tests 

The tests were given in every case either by the county director himself or 
by teachers and pupils carefully trained by him to give them. In many cases 
these persons went in pairs and assisted one another that no errors in time 
or procedure might creep in. 

It would be impossible to depict all of the experiences that the respective 
examiners have had in giving these tests. Each director had his own plan of 
getting around to the various schools. One familiar with the transportation 
facilities can easily imagine the dificulties involved in getting to the rural 
schools during the winter. The writer can speak only for Coal District, 
Harrison County, the district which the University surveyed. A detailed 
statement of how the tests were given in one county will serve as an illustration. 

Giving the Tests in Coal District 

The tests were given in Coal District during the week of December 4th and 
10th. The writer was assisted by Misses Blanche Emery, Pauline Spangler, 
Ida Smith, and Mr. J. D. Lowry, who were advanced students of the Uni¬ 
versity. Acknowledgment should be made of the fact that these persons gave 
up their work at the University and without other compensation than the 
mere expenses incident to the trip, devoted the entire week to the survey 
work. From frequent interviews with county directors, I dare bespeak the 
same interest and untiring energy for their assistants. 



Rural School Survey 


15 


Upon our arrival at Clarksburg, Superintendent J. C. Timberman and 
four of his teachers, who had previously had work in tests and measurements, 
offered their assistance. 

By the help of the superintendent and local teachers we were able to give 
the tests to all elementary schools in the district, excepting two rural schools, 
within one week. The various interurban car lines afforded us convenient 
access to most of the twenty-one school buildings. In other cases it was 
necessary for us to walk one or two miles from the car line to get to the rural 
schools. We had to rearrange our testing schedule to fit the size of the school, 
number of examiners, etc. The most difficulty was experienced in adminis¬ 
tering the tests to third grade pupils. The percent of foreign children was so 
great that we felt that the third and possibly the fourth grades hardly did 
themselves justice. This was especially true in administering the intelligence 
tests. The following order and cautions in giving the tests were observed in 
general. 


A Suggestive Schedule for Testing a Rural School 


9:00— 9:10. 
9:10— 9:30. 

9:30—10:30. 

10 : 00 — 11 : 00 . 

11:00—11:30. 

11:30—11:40. 

11:40—12:00. 


Explain the data to be filled in by the teacher. 

Spelling (Select 25 words from column N for grades 3, 4 and 5). 

(Select 25 words from column T for grades 6, 7 and 8). 

(See Word List.) 

Exam. I. Intelligence (Grades 3, 4 and 5). 

Exam. II. Complete (Grades 6, 7 and 8). (Recess of 20 
minutes for others.) 

Exam. I. Arithmetic and Reading (Grades 3, 4 and 5). Recess 
for others.) 

Rest for pupils. (Examiner check up on data from teacher 
and prepare for writing test.) 

Writing. (Following directions are taken from Monroe, 
DeVoss & Kelly.) Put the following stanza on the board 
and drill till all know it perfectly: 


Mary had a little lamb 

Its fleece was white as snow 
And everywhere that Mary went 
The lamb was sure to go. 


“Write the stanza of the poem which you have learned. When you have 
written the stanza, write it again, and keep on writing it until I tell you to 
stop. Write as well as you can and as fast as you can. Write on one side of 
your paper. When you fill one page use another. Place your paper in position 
and see that your pencil or pen and ink are ready. When I say ‘ready’ ink 
your pen and place your hand in position to write, but do not begin till I say, 
‘Start.’ When I say ‘Stop’ all stop at once and raise your hand so I can see 
that you have stopped. REMEMBER: Fast work and good work. Ready! 
Start! At the end of three minutes, ‘Stop.’ ” 



16 


West Virginia 


Cautions in Giving All Tests 

1. Never lose track of time. Be absolutely exact. 

2. Check and recheck all material before starting out to give tests. 

3. Go over all the directions the night before several times. 

4. Have a supply of pencils and extra paper always with you. 

5. Label material immediately upon collecting it, and check-up before 
leaving the school. 

6 . Place all material in large envelope and fill in the blank on outside of 
envelope. 

7. Never make a mistake in time. There’s no remedy. Never do it!!! 

Steps in Handling the Test Material 

Before the actual work of giving the tests was begun the Committee on 
Forms, assisted by University students taking the courses in Measurement, 
had prepared a number of forms which were extremely useful in collecting, 
tabulating, computing and presenting the results of the tests. These forms 
were printed and distributed, together with the testing material, by the State 
Department of Education to the various county directors. 

(Copies of each of the forms appear in the appendix. The reader will do 
well to turn to them as they are referred to.) 

The steps involved in the work of handling the materials of the test are 
listed below: 

1. As soon as the tests were given all of the papers of a single school or 
class room were placed in a large heavy envelope, upon which was placed 
the following sticker properly and completely filled out: 

WEST VIRGINIA SURVEY 


Teacher. 


School. 


Name of District. 


Tests given by. 


Computed by. 


County Director. 



2 . The 75 or 80 envelopes containing this material were shipped by parcel 
post to the University. 

3. Papers were scored according to directions accompanying the tests. 

4. The individual scores in the various subjects were placed on the Sum¬ 
mary Sheet. (Thus, each teacher had a summary record of all of her pupils.) 

5. Medians for the various grades in the various subjects were computed 
on the form headed “Comparison of School and Standard Medians.” See 
appendix.) 

6 . These medians were graphed upon the form headed “ Graph by Subject.” 

7. By means of frequency distribution forms, such as appear in the appen¬ 
dix, the various items included in the survey were compiled by rooms, schools, 
districts, counties, and finally into a state summary. 
















Rural School Survey 


17 


Since it has devolved upon the University to compile the results of the ten 
counties included in the survey, the writer wishes to call the reader’s attention 
to the magnitude of the undertaking. Hardly anyone who has not actually 
engaged in this or similar work will realize how much labor is involved. It is 
true that much of it might have been done by local teachers. On the other 
hand it would not have permitted the various directors to have checked up 
on the work and consequently to have secured as careful results as we believe 
have been secured by allowing only trained students to do the work. 

It is indeed gratifying, considering the tediousness of the task, the annoying 
handicaps under which all have had to work, and the unquestionable magni¬ 
tude of the undertaking to be able to say that the job has been completed, 
and completed with a marked degree of harmony. Not one of the ten county 
directors failed to finish his particular part of the job and to submit his report 
to the University before the end of the school year. Two of the reports came 
too late to be included in one or two of the studies which follow, but all counties 
are represented in the state averages and in the majority of the summaries. 

The following chapters present the results of the survey in respect to the 
various lines of school work investigated. 



CHAPTER II 


Classification of Pupils 

The first study that was made of results was a study of the present classi¬ 
fication of the pupils. This was done by means of 

I. AN AGE-GRADE TABLE and 

II. A MENTAL-AGEJ GRADE TABLE 

Table I. Age-Grade Tablet-State Survey, 1922 


PUPIL AGES 

Grade 3 

Grade 4 

Grade 5 

Grade 6 

Grade 7 

Grade 8 

5 yrs- 5 yrs.-ll mo. 






Accel. 

6.91% 

6 yrs.- 6 yrs.-l 1 mo. 

5 

1 

* 



Normal 

19.95% 

7 yrs.- 7 yrs.-ll mo. 

85 

11 




Ret’d. 

73.14% 

8 yrs - 8 yrs.-ll mo. 

359 

86 

9 

1 

1 


9 yrs.- 9 yrs.-l 1 mo. 

409 

321 

83 

6 



10 yrs.-lO yrs.-ll mo. 

365 

393 

227 

45 

5 


11 yrs.-ll yrs.-ll mo. 

181 

307 

323 

163 

69 

17 

12 yrs.-12 yrs.-ll mo. 

88 

223 

283 

223 

161 

80 

13 yrs.-13 yrs.-ll mo. 

62 

143 

215 

194 

219 

223 

14 yrs.-14 yrs.-ll mo. 

27 

66 

129 

114 

206 

257 

15 yrs.-15 yrs.-ll mo. 

9 

44 

70 

74 

143 

195 

16 yrs.-16 yrs.-ll mo. 

4 

9 

24 

28 

86 

128 

17 yrs.-17 yrs.-ll mo. 

i 


6 

2 

9 

37 

18 yrs.-18 yrs.-ll mo. 



1 

1 

12 

15 

Total 

1,595 

1,604 

1,370 

851 

911 

952 

Accelerated 

90 

98 

92 

52 

75 

97 

Normal 

359 

321 

227 

163 

161 

223 

Retarded 

1,146 

1,185 

1,051 

636 

675 

632 


The above table indicates at the top the grades in which the pupils are 
classified and at the left their chronological ages. We have used the Strayer- 
Englehardt Age-Grade Form. For purposes of comparisons with the state 
it is unfortunate that we did not use our own form. The heavy lines found 
in the representative columns include the number of pupils that are con¬ 
sidered normal. That is, we assume that a child starts in the first grade when 
he is six years of age. A child between eight and nine years of age who has 
made his promotion should normally be placed in the third grade; and child 
between nine and ten years of age in the fourth grade; between ten and eleven 
in the fifth grade; etc. The pupils in the spaces above the heavy lines are 
younger than the normal children of that grade, consequently those above the 
heavy lines are pedagogically ahead of where we would expect to find them, 
or what we term accelerated. 






























































Rural School Survey 


19 


The pupils below the heavy lines are older than the normal, consequently 
behind the grades in which we would expect to find them, and are what we call 
retarded. 

A glance at the distribution of the third-grade pupils shows us that 359 are 
normal; 85 one year accelerated and 5 two years accelerated; 409 are retarded 
one year, 365 two years, 181 three years, 88 four, 62 five, 27 six, 9 seven, 4 
eight, and 1 nine years retarded. The striking thing, of course, is the raage 
in ages; 5 pupils being six years old and 1 seventeen. The range of ages 
in the other grades is almost as great. 

Considering the entire table we have in the six grades 504 pupils accelerated 
from one to three years; 1454 pupils normally classified; and 5325 who are 
retarded from one to nine years. Reducing these numbers to percents, as the 
summary on the table shows us, we have 6.91% accelerated, 19.95% normal, 
and 73.14% retarded. 

The serious consequences of such a large per cent of retardation are at once 
apparent to the average teacher. He at once thinks of the difficulty of instruct¬ 
ing pupils of such variation in ages in the same class. Instruction aimed at 
the bright pupils is likely not to be understood by the slower ones, or if the 
instruction is on the plane of the backward pupils, the brighter ones are likely 
to work considerably under their capacity. Many other serious features will 
suggest themselves, but the one that impresses the average business man, 
is the actual cost required to give to these backward children the extra teach¬ 
ing. The following table makes a study of the relative costs of teaching and 
reteaching: 

Table II. Cost of Teaching and Reteaching—State Survey, 1922 


Number Pupils 

Retarded 

Total Years 
. of Reteaching 

Number Pupils 

Enrolled 

Number Years 
of Teaching 


1,824 Pupils Retarded 

1 year = 

1,824 

1,595 in third year 

= 4,785 


1,550 Pupils Retarded 

2 years = 

3,100. 

1,604 in fourth year 

= 6,416 


1,004 Pupils Retarded 

3 years = 

3,012 

1,370 in fifth year 

= 6,850 


557 Pupils Retarded 

4 years = 

2,228 

851 in sixth year 

= 5,106 


250 Pupils Retarded 

5 years = 

i,250 

911 in seventh year 

= 6,377 


109 Pupils Retarded 

6 years = 

654 

952 in 8th year 

= 7,616 


25 Pupils Retarded 

7 years = 

175 

7,283 Pupils Enrolled for Total =37,150 


5 Pupils Retarded 

8 years = 

40 

Total Years of Enrollment. 

. 37,150 

1 Pupil Retarded 

9 years = 

9 

Years of Acceleration.... 


564 

,325 Pupils Retarded for Total 

= 

12,292 

Total Years of Teaching.. 

. 36,586 

Number Pupils 

Accelerated 

Total Years 
Acceleration 




448 Pupils Accelerated 

1 year = 

448 

36,586 Years of Teaching. 


75% 

53 Pupils Accelerated 

2 years = 

106 

12,292 Years of Reteaching... 


25% 

2 Pupils Accelerated 

3 years = 

6 

48,878 Years—Total. 


100% 

1 Pupil Accelerated 

4 years = 

4 




504 Pupils Accelerated for Total 

= 

564 































20 


West Virginia 


Table II is computed from Table I. From it we find that 1824 pupils are 
retarded 1 year. This means, in case the attendance is enforced, that these 
1824 will have to be retaught, requiring 1824 pupils years of extra teaching. 
The table shows that in the six grades there are 1550 pupils who are retarded 
2 years, thereby requiring 3100 pupil years of extra teaching; 1004 pupils 
are three years retarded, requiring 3012 years qf re-teaching, etc. 

The 5325 pupils who are retarded from one to nine years have cost the 
state 12,292 years of reteaching in addition to the years of teaching for which 
they were normally entitled. 

On the other hand the accelerated pupils by getting ahead of their grades 
have saved the state 564 years; that is, the 504 accelerated pupils have 
received 564 years of teaching less than their allotted portion. 

In order to compute the amount of teaching during the six grades we mul¬ 
tiply the enrollment for each grade by the number of the grade. For example, 
by the end of the third year each of the 1595 normal third grade pupils will 
have received three years of teaching, making a total of 4785 pupil-years of 
teaching. In all, the 7283 pupils have have received 37,150 years of teaching. 

Since the accelerated pupils have saved the state 564 years of teaching, 
the total years of actual teaching is only 36,586. In other words, the state 
has given to these 5283 pupils 36,586 years of teaching and 12,292 years of 
reteaching. Reducing these figures to percents we can say that 25% of our 
school money is spent on reteaching. Putting it in another way, we are getting 
only a 75% promotion. 

The question might well be raised, should we not secure a 100% promotion ? 
We could not, of course, expect every pupil to make his promotion each year, 
but should not our system of classification make it as easy to rush the bright 
child ahead as to hold the dull one back. Should there not be as many accele¬ 
rated pupils in a school system as there are retarded ? If the average pupil is 
to receive a years’ schooling in one year it seems to the writer that we are 
forced to answer this question in the affirmative. 

As an aid to a further study of this problem, we have made a frequency 
polygon of the distribution. In doing so we have placed all of the normal 
pupils at the zero points in the frequency, the accelerated to the right, and the 
retarded to the left of the zero point when plotted on the X-Axis. (See accom¬ 
panying graph.) 





Rural School Survey 


21 



























22 


West Virginia 


After plotting the actual distribution indicated by the continuous lines, we 
have superimposed the Normal Curve of Probability upon it as indicated by 
the broken lines. This enables us to detect wherein the actual curve differs 
from the natural or ideal curve. 

If we take the broken line curve as representing the natural distribution, 
we can at once see wherein the actual distribution is at variance. In the first 
place, we note that the Arithmetic Mean, or average, of the actual distribution 
falls at 1.61 years on the retarded side, indicating that the average pupil in 
the state is 1.61 years retarded. At this point on the base line we have erected 
the Y sub-zero ordinate, whose height represents the number of cases we would 
expect to fall at this point. This number is 1772 as compared with 1824 on 
the actual distribution. 

By comparing the slopes of the actual curve with the natural curve, we see 
that the left, or retarded slope of the actual curve is longer than the retarded 
slope of the normal. Especially is the actual curve drawn out more as it 
approaches the base line, indicating an abnormal amount of extreme retarda¬ 
tion. Whereas the right slope of the actual curve is steep, showing less extreme 
acceleration than the normal curve, leads us to expect. The curve enables us 
to see more clearly what the table tells us, namely that we do not have as 
many that are considerably accelerated as are considerably retarded. Looking 
at the high points of our curves we see that there are perhaps more pupils 
slightly accelerated, say one-half to a year, than we should expect. 

The following graph is an attempt to study the variability of ages by grades: 

Fig 2. Showing the Standard Deviation Range or Middle Two-Thirds 


Pupil Ages 

Grade 3 . 

Grade 4 , 

Grade 5 

Grade" 6 

Grsde Vi 

Grade 8 

6yrs-6yrs 





















8 yvo+Qyra 



. /So 

• 




9yrs«10yrs 

i 







lOyxs^llyrs 



¥ 

■3./S 

¥ 

i 




33 

Iff- 


| 





l£Srre«»13yrs ' 


•f-0 0 

Ijr 

< 

% 


J\0 

lSyro-l^yrs 



jF 


.. 

jr 


14yro»15yra 





T 

15yrs»16yrs 





A/3 

1 

lCyro«l?yrs 






/«3 

XTyro-lOyra 







lGyro-lOyre 







<> 19yro**20yro 







area-; --- 





















































Rural School Survey 


23 


The vertical heavy lines of this graph indicate the range of the middle 
68.26% in the different grades. In constructing this graph the Standard 
Deviation for the entire six grades was taken. It was found to be 1.64 years. 
The numbers above these heavy lines indicate the number of pupils who are 
accelerated 1.64 years or more; the number below the heavy lines indicate 
the number who are retarded 1.64 years or more. That is, if we should attempt 
to classify rigidly on the basis of chronological age (which, of course, we should 
not do), using standard deviation as our unit of variability we would have to 
promote or otherwise provide for those above the standard range and demote 
those below. 

These and other studies of the matter of classification lead the writer to 
conclude that the greatest fault in our classification of pupils throughout the 
state is our neglect in discovering and promoting the bright pupils. Our study 
confirms Terman’s statement that it is the bright boy or girl who is being 
retarded by our system of promotion. 

The general recommendation that the writer would make in order to improve 
the classification would be to aim the instruction at the middle two-thirds of 
the group and provide special classes for both accelerated and retarded pupils. 
It is just as important to provide “furthering classes” for the bright pupils 
enabling them to go ahead, as to provide special classes for the slow pupils. 
Each group is entitled to eight years of the kind of elementary schooling it is 
capable of taking. To fail to provide a full program for each is poor manage¬ 
ment of the intellectual resources of our state. 

Causes of Retardation 

The great amount of retardation indicated in the Age-Grade Table naturally 
leads us to ask what are the reasons for it ? 

It would indeed be difficult to discuss all of the causes. It is evident for 
some reason that 73% of our pupils have from time to time failed to satisfy 
the standard which their teachers have set up for their promotion. The 
following are some of the outstanding questions that arise: 

1. To what extent is the mentality of the pupils to blame ? 

2. How far are the educational advantages, including school plant, teacher, 
organization, etc., responsible ? 

3. How seriously is their progress affected by irregular attendance ? 

Mental Age-Grade Table 

In order to study the relation that mentality bears to retardation an intelli¬ 
gence test was given to all pupils included in the survey. From the results 
of these tests the following Mental Age-Grade Table was constructed. 



24 


West Virginia 


Table III. Mental Age-Grade Table—State Survey, 1922 


Mental Ages 

Point Scores 

Grade 3 

Grade 4 

Grade 5 

Grade 6 

Grade 7 

Grade 8 

5 years- 6 years 

0^ 

94 

26 

2 


1 

1 

6 years- 7 years 

5-14 

490 

166 

26 

9 

2 

2 

7 years- 8 years 

15-24 

512 

371 

136 

32 

9 

3 

8 years- 9 years 

25-34 

300 

435 

287 

100 

51 

20 

9 years-10 years 

35-44 . 

91 

258 

326 

213 

105 

63 

10 years-11 years 

45-54 

27 

148 

288 

229 

151 

117 

11 years-12 years 

55-64 

11 

56 

131 

189 

203 

141 

12 years-13 years 

65-74 

4 

19 

53 

104 

157 

188 

13 years-14 years 

75-84 

1 

5 

44 

56 

110 

138 

14 years-15 years 

85-94 


3 

5 

20 

46 

108 

15 years-16 years 

95-104 


2 

2 

12 

19 

56 

16 years-17 years 

105-114 



2 

2 

7 

31 

17 years-18 years 

115-124 





3 

17 

18 years-19 years 

125-134 



1 


1 

7 

TOTAL 

1,530 

1,479 

1,303 

966 

865 

892 

Accelerated 

1,096 

998 

777 

583 

522 

537 

Normal 

300 

258 

288 

189 

157 

138 

Retarded 

134 

223 

238 

194 

186 

219 

Median 

7-5 

8-5 

9-7 

10-7 

11-7 

12-6 


This table is similar to the Age-Grade Table, except that it includes the 
point scores corresponding to the ages. That is, mental age is determined by 
the point score a pupil makes on the intelligence test. If a pupil makes a score 
between 0 and 4 he is classified as between five and six years old; if he makes 
a score between 5 and 14 he is classed as between six and seven years of age, etc. 

As in the Age-Grade Table the heavy lines in the respective columns indi¬ 
cate the pupils of normal mental age for those grades. That is, we assume 
that a third grade pupil is eight years old mentally. A study of the third 
grade distribution shows us that we have 300 pupils of normal age mentally, 
1096 pupils who are from one to four years younger than the normal, and 
134 who are from one to five years older than the normal. We have designated 
the pupils above the heavy line as accelerated, because pedagogically they are 
in respect to their mental ability farther along than they should be. Whereas, 
those below the heavy line are pedagogically retarded. A glance at the sum¬ 
maries reveal that there are considerably more pupils who are too young 
mentally than too old for the grades in which they are placed. Computing the 
arithmetic mean for the entire eight grades we find that the mental age of 
the average pupil is .91 years less than the mental age of the normal pupil. 
In other words, our pupils on the average are pedagogically placed .91 years 
farther along than their mentality would warrant. When we add to this fact, 
what the Age-Grade Table revealed, viz., that even placed as they are, they 
are still 1.61 years behind where they should be considering their chronogical 
age, we are brought face to face with the actual retardation. In other words. 







































Rural School Survey 


25 


if placed according to mental age our pupils would be on the average .91 plus 
1.61 years or 2.52 years retarded. 

The following “Comparative Age Study” enable us to see this more clearly: 


Table IV. Comparative Age Study—State Survey, 1922 



Grade 3 

Grade 4 

Grade 5 

Grade 6 

Grade 7 

Grade 8 

Chronological Age 

9-10 

10-11 

12-2 

.12-10 

13-9 

14-6 

Mental Age 

7- 5 

8- 5 

9-7 

10- 7 

11-7 

12-6 

Achievement Age 

7- 5 

8- 4 

9-6 

10- 8 

11-8 

12-7 


This table enables us to compare the chronological, mental, and achievement 
ages by grades. The chronological age of the median third grade pupil is 9 
years and 10 months; the mental age of the median pupil of this grade is 7 
years and 5 months. As stated before on an average, the median pupil of the 
various grades is mentally about two and one-half years behind his chronolo¬ 
gical age. It would seem that this fact alone explains in great part the retardation. 

When we couple with this fact the fact that the achievement age or progress 
in school subjects, which will be explained later, practically agrees with the 
mental age, we are further confirmed in our conclusion that a very large factor 
in retardation is the mental capacity of the pupils. 

The question naturally arises, why is the average intelligence of our pupils 
so far below the normal ? And is it uniformaly true throughout the state ? 
A roll call of counties is in order at this point. 


Table V. Comparison of Mental and Chronological Ages by Counties 



M. A. 

C. A. • 

Per Cent 
of Standard 

Berkeley 

10 

12- 3 

82 

Braxton 

9-10 

12-11 

76 

Brooke 

11- 4 

12- 3 

92 

Gilmer 

10- 6 

13-4 

79 

Harrison 

9-10 

12- 3 

80 

Logan 

10-11 

•12- 9 

85 

Marion 

9-10 

12- 4 

80 

Monroe 

9- 6 

12- 4 

77 

Upshur 

10- 2 

13- 3 

77 

Wetzel 

10- 0 

12- 5' 

80 


The first column of the above shows the mental age of the median pupil of 
each county. The second column shows the percent the mental age is of the 
chronological age. Since in the standards the two ages agree we may say that 
the third column shows the percent the mental age of the median pupil in 
each county is of the standard age. 



















































26 


West Virginia 


Apparently the pupils of Brooke county approach more nearly the mental 
age of our standard than any other; those of Logan county rank second. The 
other counties do not vary a great deal from the medians, which is 80% of 
standard. This leads us to suspect that pupils tested in establishing these 
norms or standards were somewhat selected and of more than average intelligence. 

It is without the province of the survey to answer the questions as to why 
West Virginia pupils are on the average below the standards in intelligence, 
we have no evidence bearing on the subject. It suggests an interesting line 
of investigation for the student of sociology. It is to be hoped that some socio¬ 
logist will make a study of the matter and acquaint us with his findings. Mr. 
Gilbert L. Brown has an interesting article in the April number 1922 of the 
Journal of Educational Research on “Intelligence as Related to Nationality.” 

Since the standards used in arithmetic and reading are taken from the 
Illinois Examination battery of tests it is well to keep before us constantly a 
comparison of our West Virginia medians with the standard standards. The 
following is a graph, of intelligence: 

Fig. 3. Showing Comparisons of West Virginia Scores with Standards 



In the above graph the upper line is the Illinois Standard, the lower one 
the West Virginia median. The uniformity of the increase in the two curves 
.is an index of the accuracy of the survey. In studying the achievement as 
shown in the educational subjects that follow, it is necessary to allow for the 
handicap in mentality. That is, we should be prepared to expect a corres- 
pongingly low achievement. For as pointed out in the “Comparative Age 
Study” table the achievement age and mental ages run parrallel. In the 
following chapter we shall compare the achievement in the various school 
subjects with the standards. 






























CHAPTER III 


A Study of Educational Achievement as Indicated by Central Tendencies 

The present chapter proposes to study the progress of West Virginia in 
the Educational subjects. In order to make this study, the following tests 
and scales were used: 

1. The Illinois Examination Test in Arithmetic. 

2. The Illinois Test in Silent Reading. 

8. Ayre’s Writing Scale, Gettysburg Edition. 

4. Buckingham’s Extension of Ayre’s Spelling Scale. 

In order that we might get some idea of the amount of time that the ele¬ 
mentary schools are spending on these four subjects, a careful examination 
of almost 100 study lists of Coal District was made, and the time devoted to 
these subjects actually computed. This examination revealed that prac¬ 
tically 60% of the entire time was given to these subjects, as follows: Arith¬ 
metic 17%; Reading 27%; Writing 6%; and Spelling 8%. Had we included 
History and Language, we would have tested 80% or more of the work. 

Arithmetic 

A study of the work done in Arithmetic was made by means of giving 
pupils from the third to eighth grades the arithmetic tests contained in the 
Illinois Examination Tests I and II. Tests I were given to grades three, four, 
and five; Tests II to grades six, seven, and eight. Test I consists of two cycles 
of the four fundamentals in spiral order, making eight sets of problems, con¬ 
taining about 50 problems in each set. Test II consists of seven sets, as follows: 
(1) Addition, (2) Subtraction, (3) Multiplication, (4) Division, (5) Addition 
and Subtraction of Fractions, (6) Division of Fractions, (7) Decimal Fractions. 

The papers were scored according to directions. The total number of 
problems solved correctly in the given time computed, the score of each 
pupil. A correction of 22 was added to the score in Examination II in order 
to make them comparable with Examination I scores. These scores of the 
individual pupils were placed on the Class Summary Sheets (see appendix). 
From the individual scores medians were computed for the respective classes 
and compared to the Standards. The various county directors and their 
assistants likewise combined the scores of the pupils in their various school 
systems and provided the teachers, principals, and superintendents with the 
standing of their pupils. Graphs of the results in all subjects were made on a 
blank form, known as “Graph by Subject.” This enables a superintendent 
to study the progress of his school grade by grade in the various subjects. 
At this point the reader would do well to study the State Graph in the appen¬ 
dix. Each of the county directors made a similar compilation for each of the 
districts, and also a final summary by frequencies of his entire county. From 
the County Summaries which were sent to the University, we have compiled 
the State Summary. The following table and diagram represents the medians 
of the ten counties of West Virginia as compared with the Illinois Standards. 


28 


West Virginia 


Table VI. Arithmetic 



Grade 3 

Grade 4 

Grade 5 

Grade 6 

Grade 7 

Grade 8 

Standard 

12 

23 

37 

45 

56 

63 

West Virginia 

8 

16 

28 

39 

44 

49 


Fig. 4. Showing the Comparison of State and Standard Score in Arithmetic 


1 AS1TH M E T T 

Ttr- 'll 



1 

1 

■-1 





1 

1 



fcs- (o 







(oO ~ &4 






Z2* 

- 6 9 





¥ 


50 - 34 







4 5 -43 




M 



40-44 







1*5 - 33 



A 

f / 



3>0 - 14 



/ 




Ats - OA 



/ / 




2,0 - 2,4 







is - \q 


Y , 





10-14- 







s- q 



1 





It is obvious at a glance at the above graph that West Virginia is con¬ 
siderably below standard in every grade. The uniformity of the retardation 
in Arithmetic is rather striking. The seventh and eighth grades, are, if any¬ 
thing, a little farther behind than earlier grades. The various county directrrs 
have probably inquired into the causes of this condition and have perhaps 
discussed them in delivering the county surveys. The writer has been interested 
in comparing these findings with arithmetic scores in Charleston, Huntington, 
and other parts of the state. In general he has found that only those schools 
in which there has been systematic use made of practice cards, such as the 
Studebaker or Courtis Practice Cards, the schools fall decidedly below the 
standards. He found by giving the Courtis Standard Tests Series B to Charles¬ 
ton schools that the pupils were well up to standard. Practice cards have been 
in use in Charleston for years. The Courtis Medians, if anything, are higher 
than those for the Illinois tests. We see, then, that these standards can be 
achieved. 

We would recommend that teachers and superintendents study the short 
comings of their respective schools in respect to arithmetic as revealed by the 
survey reports. If necessary diagnose the case further by the Cleveland 
Survey Tests. Then secure the appropriate practice cards and insist upon 
their rigilent and intelligent use. Either set of cards can be had from the 
World Book Company, Yonkers-on-Hudson, New York. This procedure is 
urged, not for the sake of encouraging an undue emphasis upon arithmetic, 
but in the interests of encouraging the time spent on drill. This is not saying 












































Rural School Survey 


29 


we should give less time to arithmetic, but that we should achieve more in 
the time we now devote to it. We would not underestimate the importance 
of the subject. There is an appalling lack of accuracy in the fundamentals of 
arithmetic. A closer eye to the amount of time wasted in Algebra and Geo¬ 
metry in High School and higher mathematics in college due to inability to add, 
subtract, multiply, and divide, will incline teachers and supervisors to tighten 
up on requirements in arithmetic all along the line. The higher processes 
cannot come to them in full fruition unless the elementary processes are 
made automatic. 


Reading 

As a means of studying the efficiency of pupils in reading, the reading test 
included in the Illinois Examination was used. This test includes a number 
of short exercises to be read silently. Each exercise asks some question. The 
pupil reads the exercise and answers the question by underlining a word. 
The score value of each of these exercises has been determined and placed 
beside the exercise. Each paper is given two scores. One for rate and one 
for comprehension. A correction of 29 is added to the scores for pupils of grades 
six, seven, and eight in order to make them comparable to score for pupils 
in grades three, four, and five. 

The following tables and graphs show the medians made by West Virginia 
pupils as compared to the standard scores. 


Table VII. Rate of Reading 


GRADES 

Grade 3 

Grade 4 

Grade 5 

Grade 6 

Grade 7 

Grade 8 

Standard 

88 

126 

145 

161 

173 

186 

West Virginia 

69 

95 

121 

147 

156 

167 


Table VIII. Comprehension of Reading 


GRADES 

Grade 3 

Grade 4 

Grade 5 

Grade 6 

Grade 7 

Grade 8 

Standard 

4 

8 

10 

11 

12.5 

14 

West Virginia 

3.4 

5.4 

7.9 

9.6 

11 

12.6 


Fig. 5. Showing the Comparison cf State and Standard Scores in Reading 


f.OMPRF HENSIOM OF READING 








15 -is.qq 







I+-N-.91 







i3 I3.99 







ia,-u<w 






S ^ i 

ii- 11.99 







10- 







q -q.qq 







q -s.qq 









/ 





£>-6.99 


/ 



N 


5 - 599 


~/y 





If - 4- .99 

| 

r,s 





t- 3.99 







n-3.99 







Gxtaasi 

E £ 

L 1 

U Cl Cl 



.nt YH 

































































































30 


West Virginia 


As in the case of arithmetic we find West Virginia uniformily behind in all 
grades. The retardation in rate of reading seems to be just about one year. 
The only grade in which it is more than a year is the sixth. 

In comprehension West Virginia is likewise about one year behind. If we 
should compare these .graphs with the graph for Intelligence, we will see that 
there is a worked similarity. The retardation is not any more than we should 
expect. In all these comparisons the reader should bear in mind that the 
scores are medians. There are many pupils in each grade that surpass the 
standards. As we shall show by a later study, the range of scores in all sub¬ 
jects is large. 

Although the retardation is not bad, it should be overcome. The writer 
noted that in many of the schools which he personally surveyed considerable 
emphasis was laid upon oral reading. One eighth grade teacher said his remedy 
for the poor reading was “to make the pupils stand up and read aloud.” 
On the contrary, we would recommend that silent reading be emphasized. 
Individual attention may reveal bad habits, such as lip-reading, or improper 
breathing habits, or regressive and slow eye movements. The teacher should 
make every effort to correct these faults. Each school should be well supplied 
with perception material in order to increase the rate. Much supplementary 
reading should be .required. This should be a comparatively easy character 
that pupils may form the proper eye movements. When we consider that 
the reading habits formed in the early years of school life determine largely 
the rate at which they acquire information throughout life, we see the import¬ 
ance of giving silent reading the maximum of attention. Studies of time 
schedules reveal 27 % of the time of the elementary schooling devoted to reading. 
If one-half of this time were spent in carefully training children to read at the 
maximum rate at which they can comprehend what they read, the writer 
believes that the reading efficiency would easily be doubled. The person 
who can read at the rate of 300 or 400 wrods per minute has a tremendous 
lead over the oral reader limited to 100 to 150 words per minute. Teachers 
should make it their business to know the rate at which their pupils read. 
Frequent tests, self devised, should be given to ascertain whether or not the 
proper progress was being made. 

Handwriting 

Samples of handwriting were taken by pupils from the third to the eighth 
grade. Under definite direction pupils were asked to write the first stanza 
of “Mary had a Little Lamb.” They were asked to write the stanza as many 
times as they could within three minutes, at the same time giving attention 
to quality. 

The papers were scored for quality according to Ayers Handwriting Scale, 
Gettysburg Edition. The rate was obtained by counting the number of 
letters and by dividing by three. The respective medians a-1 class, school, 
district, county, and state were then computed. The following tables and 
graphs show the West Virginia median as compared with the Standards 
established by Ayers: 




Rural School Survey 


31 


Table IX. Speed in Handwriting—(Letters Per Minute) 



Grade 3 

Grade-4 

Grade 5 

Grade 6 

Grade 7 

Grade 8 

Standard 

44 

56 

64 

70 

76 

80 

West Virginia 

29 

44 

55 

62 

68 

72 


Fig. 6. Showing the Comparison of State and Standard Scores in Speed 

of Handwriting 


SPEED OF W 

R1T1NC 

IJO-IJW 







no-iiq 







100-104 







qo-qq 













g 1 

10-14 







bo-tl 







so-sq 







K.0-U-4 







- *q 







20-.24 

2 






i£LdS_ 








Table X. Quality of Handwriting—(Ayers Scale) 



Grade 3 

Grade 4 

Grade 5 

Grade 6 

Grade 7 

Grade 8 

Standard 

42 

46 

50 

54 

58 

62 

West Virginia 

33 

34 

38 

40 

44 

51 


Fig. 7. Showing Comparison of State and Standard Scores in Quality of 

Handwriting 

























































































32 


West Virginia 


In respect to speed the situation in handwriting is not so bad. West Vir¬ 
ginia is on the average about one grade behind. It looks as if there was con¬ 
siderable effort to increase the speed of writing. 

In respect to quality the situation is decidedly embarrassing. Not until 
the seventh grade does West Virginia surpass the third grade standard. Some 
consolation may be sought, perhaps, in the fact that handwriting is not as 
necessary as before the days of shorthand and typewriting. In fact, the 
standard of the Municipal Civil Service Commission of New York corres¬ 
ponds to 40 and 50 on the Ayres Scale; 40 for general position, and 50 for posi¬ 
tion where writing is a special requirement. There is still a demand for legible 
handwriting on the part of almost every one. If our pupils fall below a reason¬ 
able standard upon completing the eighth grade we can but imagine how much 
their writing deteriorates after leaving school. 

The graph‘suggests that very little is being done toward securing results 
in quality of penmanship before the eighth grade. Before we can hope to 
achieve the Ayre’s Standard, it is certain that special attention must be given 
to the subject. Attention must be focused upon individuals. Their special 
difficulties should be discovered and corrected by the necessary practice 
peculiar to their individual needs. Regardless of the system used, teachers 
should not rely entirely on class drills in handwriting. Not a great deal of 
time should be spent on the class work as a whole. Pupils who persistently 
fall below a reasonable quality should be required to join a writing “hospital 
class” and meet perhaps twice a week after school. As a means of diagnosing 
, individual faults the writer recommends the use of “Treeman’s Analytical 
Scale for Judging Handwriting.” It is an excellent aid to pupils in discovering 
their individual weaknesses. Houghton Mifflin & Company publish this 
scale. Gray’s Score Card suggests a convenient form for recording progress 
along specified lines. All such aids should be supplemented, however, by 
much individually dissected practice. 

Spelling 

The spelling ability of the pupils was studied by means of the Bucking¬ 
ham’s Extension of Ayers Spelling Scale. Twenty-five words from Column N 
were given to pupils in grades three, four, and five; twenty-five words from 
Column T were given to grades six, seven, and eight. The words were chosen 
from the Buckingham Extension. The two lists are given below: 

For Grades 3, 4, and 5 For Grades 6, 7 and 8 


1. arithmetic 

14. fasten 

1. ache 

14. 

deceive 

2. breakfast 

15. flour 

2. amusement 

15. 

discoveries 

3. breeze 

16. forest 

3. approval 

16. 

electricity 

4. broad 

17. gentle 

4. banana 

17. 

error 

5. chance 

18. holes 

5. biscuits 

18. 

exceptions 

6. climb 

19. hotel 

6. bruised 

19. 

favorite 

7. coffee 

20. iron 

7. burglar 

20. 

genuine 

8. color 

■. 21. living 

8. business 

21. 

handful 

9. contains 

22. monkey 

9. changeable 

22. 

hymn 

10. daily 

23. noise 

10. chimney 

23. 

investigation 

11. eagle 

24. ocean 

11. choir 

24. 

lilies 

12. excuse 

13. fancy 

25. pencil 

12, commence 

13. compute 

25. 

liquor 




Rural School Survey 


33 


A table and graph showing the position West Virginia occupies in spelling 
is given below. 


Table XI. Spelling 



III 

IV 

V 

VI 

VII 

VIII 

Standard 

58 

79 

88 

66 

79 

88 

West Virginia 

24 

60 

81 

43 

64 

78 


Fig. 8. Showing Comparison of State and Standard Scores in Spelling 



The broken line in the above graph is due to the fact that the two lists of 
words with varying standards were used. The writer believes that the ex¬ 
tremely poor showing by the third grade is partly explained by the inability 
of pupils to write. If words have been spelled orally no doubt they would 
have made a better showing. Aside from this explanation he is unable to 
understand why our schools should do so poorly in spelling. From a study of 
the time devoted to this subject in Coal District, it was found that 8% of 
the school day was spent on Spelling, or about 30 minutes a day. This leads 
one to question, just how is this time used ? The extreme amount of varia¬ 
bility confirms one in the suspicion that the time is largely spent on testing 
their spelling. It is very common to find that some pupils in a grade miss 
every one of the 25 words, whereas, others spelled every word. If the thirty 
minutes were devoted to supervised study of the spelling lesson, in which 
the teacher enables the individual pupil to discover why he misspelled a given 
word, it is likely the class achievement 4 would be more uniform. Surely the 
poor speller would learn to spell a few words during the thirty minutes. It 
is a pretty strong indictment against the lack of personal interest in the progress 
of her pupils for a teacher to permit them to spend thirty minutes a day 
spelling and then be unable to spell less than a fourth of their words. A 









































34 


West Virginia 


spelling hospital such as was suggested in handwriting might be formed for 
the habitually poor spellers. Too much time should not be taken with the 
class as a whole. The futility of the spelling grind was pointed out by J. M. 
Rice years ago. 


Summary of Educational Tests 

In order that we may have a complete record of the comparative ages 
and educational scores in a convenient form for record, we have put together 
the preceding tables into the following Summary Table of Standard and 
State Medians: 


Table XII. Showing Standard and State Medians 




Grade 3 

Grade 4 

Grade 5 

Grade 6 

Grade 7 

Grade 8 

Ages 

Standard 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

State 

9-10 

10-11 

12-2 

12-10 

13-9 

14-6 

Intelligence 

Standard 

25 

40 

53 

66 

78 

89 

State 

19 

29 

41 

51 

61 

70 

Arithmetic 

Standard 

12 

23 

37 

45 

56 

63 

State 

8 

16 

28 

39 

44 

49 

Rate of Reading 

Standard 

88 

126 

145 

161 

173 

186 

State 

69 

95 ' 

121 

147 

156 

167 

Comp, of Reading 

Standard 

4 

8 

10 

11 

12.5 

14 

State 

3.4 

5.4 

7.9 

9.6 

11 

12.6 

Speed of Writing 

Standard 

44 

56 

64 

70 

76- 

80 

State 

29 

44 

55 

62 

68 

72 

Quality of Writing 

Standard 

42 

46 

50 

54 

58 

62 

State 

33 

34 

38 

40 

44 

51 

Spelling 

Standard 

58 

79 

88 

66 

79 

88 

State 

24 

60 

81 

43 

64 

78 


Achievement Age 

From the above data a number of interesting studies may be made. In 
order to make a direct comparison of the combined achievement in the various 
school subjects we have computed a combination grade for all known as the 
Achievement Age. That we may compare the Educational progress of one 
grade with another, or one school with another, or county with another, it is 
very desirable to have a single score that will represent all the subjects. Owing 
to the fact that reading and arithmetic are more important than writing and 
spelling, obviously it would not be fair to add the scores together. In other 
words, the various subjects must be weighted in some way. Any method 
one might use is more or less arbitrary. The method we used is in part arbi¬ 
trary and in part statistical in nature. We examined the study lists of about 
80 teachers of Coal District and computed the exact amount of time given 
to these subjects. We found, as previously stated, that 27% of the entire 

































Rural School Survey 


35 


school day was devoted to reading, 16% to arithmetic, 8% to spelling, and 6% 
to writing. Again, members of the class taking the work in measurement 
in the University were asked to weight the subjects according to their idea 
of their importance on the basis of a total of 1000 points. A median of the 
estimates was found to be as follows: Reading 400, (a) rate 200, (b) com¬ 
prehension 200, Arithmetic 300; Speed of Writing 100; Quality of Writing 
100, and Spelling 100. These values are rather close of the values that the 
time devoted to the subject would assign it. 

In computing the combined achievement age, we have allowed a school 
grade that is up to standard in arithmetic 300 points; in rate of reading 200 
points; in comprehension 200 points; in speed of writing 100 points; in 
quality of writing 100 points; and in spelling 100 points, making a total of 
1000 points. 

In order to determine the achievement of any class, school, district, or 
county, we first figure out what per cent its score is of the standard score. 
Then we multiply it by either three, two, or one hundred and add the results. 
For an example, the third grade standard in arithmetic is 12, the West Vir¬ 
ginia score is 8 or 66 2/3% of standard. Rate of Reading Standard is 88, 
West Virginia is 69 or 78% of standard. Comprehension of Reading Standard 
is 4, West Virginia is 3.4 or 82%. Speed of Writing standard is 44, West 
Virginia is 29. Quality of Writing standard is 58, West Virginia 33, or 79%. 
Spelling standard is 58, West Virginia 24, or 41%. If we multiply these per¬ 
cents by the respective weights, we have: 

Arithmetic. 66% x 3 = 200 

Reading Rate. 78%x2 = 156 

Comprehension. 82% x 2 = 164 

Speed of Writing. 66% x 1 = 66 

Quality Writing. 79% xl = 79 

Spelling. 41 % x 1 = 41 

Percent of standard of combined Achievement is. 706 

or 706 out of a possible one thousand'. In a similar way the percents of stand¬ 
ards of the six grades have been combined and the arithmetic mean, or average, 
computed as the achievement of that county. 

The following graph represents the ten counties included in the survey: 










36 


West Virginia 


Fig. 9. Showing Achievement Scores of Ten Counties, State Summary, 1922 


STANDARD 

LOGAN 

BROOKS 

WETZEL 

MDNROK 

UPSHUR 

GILMER 

MARION 

BERKELEY 

BRAXTON 

HARRISON 

STATE 



It is interesting to note that Logan county stands first, being 91% of the 
Standard. Brooke is a close second. Wetzel, Monroe, and Upshur relatively 
close together. The remaining counties vary considerably with Harrison 
County 68% of Standard. The average for the state is 79.94%. Hence, in 
so far as the tests used measure, the achievement of our pulils of West Virginia 
is doing about 80% of the work done in these subjects that pupils of Illinois, 
or the pupils upon which the standards are based. 

Achievement Quotient 


In order to answer our second question raised in discussing the cause of 
retardation, viz., How far are the educational advantages including school 
plant teachers, etc., responsible for the retardation previously mentioned, 
we must consider the above achievement in counties with the intelligence of 
the pupils in the various counties. Before we can evaluate the teaching and 
other educational factors, we must know the material with which the schools 
have to deal. We take this factor into account when we divide the average 
achievement score of a county by the average achievement percent that the 
county is of the standard in intelligence. In other words, the achievement 
age divided by the mental age gives the achievement quotient. We should 
expect a pupil eight years old mentally to be eight years old educationally. 
If he were, we would conclude that his school is up to standard. 

The following graph shows the achievement quotient of eight counties. 
The writer is forced to explain that when the quotients were computed, Monroe 
and Wetzel counties had not yet sent in their reports: 












Rural School Survey 


37 


Fig. 10. Achievement Quotient of Eight Counties. State Survey, 1922 



The above graph is a little more encouraging to those engaged in the work 
of Education in West Virginia. Almost every county is working up to its 
capacity. That is, considering the ability of pupils with which we have to 
deal our schools are doing as well as the schools of Illinois, or the schools 
upon which the standards are based. 

If we should term this ratio school achievement, we may say that Marion 
county, first in the list, has a school achievement of 103.2%. Logan a school 
achievement of 102. Persons more familiar with the state than the writer 
can perhaps find reasons why this is true. Doubtless teachers in Marion and 
Logan counties can explain it perfectly. The writer makes no effort to do this, 
but believes that there is an explanation somewhere. The evidence submitted 
by the survey does not permit further analysis of the situation. Anyone who 
has a theory is at liberty to investigate further and vindicate or refute his 
theory. A complete record of the medians of all the counties in all subjects, 
including State Medians, is found below. 







38 


West Virginia 


Table XIII. Comparison of County and State Medians 


NAME OF 
COUNTY 

Grade 

Ages 

Intel¬ 

ligence 

Arith¬ 

metic 

Reading 

Writing 

Spelling 

Yrs. 

Mos. 

Rate 

Comp. 

Speed 

Quality 

W. VA. S. 

3 

9 

10 

19 

8 

48 

3.4 

29 

33 

24 

Berkeley. 

3 

10 

4 

16 

7 

48 

2 

30 

31 

36 

Braxton. 

3 

10 

3 

16 

6 

70 

2 

27 

30 

36 

Brooke. 

3 

9 

9 

28 

11 

93 

5 

29 

35 

20 

Gilmer. 

3 

10 

10 

26 

9 

85 

3 

25 

30 

60 

Harrison. 

3 

9 

9 

18 

6 

45 

1 

28 

31 

9 

Logan. 

3 

10 

2 

25 

14 

89 

4.3 

39 

34 

40 

Marion. 

3 

9 

8 

15 

8 

62 

3 

27 

32 

6 

Monroe. 

3 

9 

8 

19 

9 

75 

2.9 

33 

33 

58 

Upshur. 

3 

10 

4 

19 

8 

64 

2.5 

30 

35 

42 

Wetzel. 

3 

9 

10 

13 

7 

72 

3 

29 

36 

29 

W. VA. S. 

4 

10 

11 

29 

16 

95 

5.4 

44 

34 

60 

Berkeley. 

4 

10 

8 

28 

16 

91 

4.5 

47 

37 

64 

Braxton. 

4 

11 

2 

26 

11 

86 

4 

40 

30 

72 

Brooke. 

4 

11 

1 

44 

18 

110 

6 

53 

41 

48 

Gilmer. 

4 

12 

2 

43 

14 

110 

6 

39 

34 

84 

Harrison. 

4 

10 

11 

26 

13 

87 

3.8 

43 

33 

35 

Logan. 

4 

10 

10 

38 

23 

124 

7 

50 

35 

66 

Marion. 

4 

10 

10 

30 

13 

92 

5 

43 

34 

52 

Monroe. 

4 

11 

2 

29 

19 

94 

5.5 

41 

40 

81 

Upshur. 

4 

11 

10 

29 

20 

84 

4.2 

47 

42 

75 

Wetzel. 

4 

10 

10 

28 

19 

89 

5 

46 

31 

58 


Table XIII—Continued 


NAME OF 
COUNTY 

Grade 

Ages 

Intel¬ 

ligence 

Arith¬ 

metic 

Reading 

Writing 

Spelling 

Yrs. 

Mos. 

Rate 

Comp. 

Speed 

Quality 

W. VA. S. 

5 

12 

2 

41 

28 

121 

7.9 

55 

38 

81 

Berkeley. 

5 

11 

3 

38 

28 

107 

6.8 

56 

38 

83 

Braxton. 

5 

12 

7 

42 

23 

111 

7 

51 

40 

84 

Brooke. 

5 

12 

7 

53 

27 

130 

9 

58 

51 

56 

Gilmer. 

5 

12 

9 

45 

24 

131 

7 

48 

46 

80 

Harrison. 

5 

11 

10 

38 

26 

118 

6.1 

55 

33 

70 

Logan. 

5 

12 

2 

53 

33 

140 

6.6 

58 

37 

89 

Marion. 

5 

11 

11 

35 

28 

112 

7 

56 

35 

70 

Monroe. 

5 

10 

10 

37 

26 

119 

7.7 

57 

41 

91 

Upshur. 

5 

11 

11 

42 

28 

121 

7.8 

47 

49 

88 

Wetzel. 

5 

11 

9 

41 

31 

119 

8 

57 

42 

83 

W. VA. S. 

6 

12 

10 

51 

39 

147 

9.6 

63 

40 

43 

Berkeley. 

6 

12 

9 

50 

35 

150 

9.4 

58 

41 

54 

Braxton. 

6 

13 

1 

51 

35 

130 

9 

62 

40 

52 

Brooke. 

6 

13 

.7 

70 

47 

157 

10 

69 

44 

36 

Gilmer. 

6 

13 

10 

49 

34 

134 

9 

48 

43 

52 

Harrison. 

6 

12 

9 

47 

37 

132 

7.5 

62 

33 

34 

Logan. 

6 

12 

9 

56 

33 

168 

11.1 

65 

41 

51 

Marion. 

6 

12 

0 

53 

40 

143 

9.8 

68 

35 

47 

Monroe. 

6 

13 

2 

44 

37 

123 

9.4 

62 

46 

72 

Upshur. 

6 

13 

11 

54 

40 

143 

8.5 

58 

50 

74 

Wetzel. 

6 

13 

1 

53 

54 

148 

10 

59 

41 

33 


























































































Rural School Survey 


39 


Table XIII—Continued 


NAME OF 
COUNTY 

Grade 

Ages 

Intel¬ 

ligence 

Arith¬ 

metic 

Reading 

Writing 

Spelling 

Yrs. 

Mos. 

Rate 

Comp. 

Speed 

Quality 

W. VA. S. 

7 

13 

9 

61 

44 

156 

11 

68 

44 

64 

Berkeley. 

7 

14 

3 

66 

39 

139 

9.6 

64 

44 

69 

Braxton. 

7 

14 

10 

56 

40 

154 

10 

63 

40 

80 

Brooke. 

7 

12. 

6 

73 

56 

167 

12.5 

63 

54 

48 

Gilmer. 

7 

14 

7 

63 

43 

139 

10 

64 

49 

76 

Harrison. 

7 

13 

7 

60 

44 

156 

8.9 

74 

37 

48 

Logan. 

7 

13 

9 

68 

47 

166 

12.3 

78 

43 

74 

Marion. 

7 

14 

0 

59 

42 

160 

10.5 

68 

43 

52 

Monroe. 

7 

14 

5 

52 

41 

154 

10.6 

68 

53 

81 

Upshur. 

7 

14 

8 

61 

43 

150 

10.3 

71 

54 

78 

Wetzel. 

7 

13 

6 

62 

55 

152 

11 

53 

56 

67 

W. VA. S. 

8 

14 

6 

70 

49 

167 

12.6 

72 

51 

78 

Berkeley. 

8 

14 

3 

69 

54 

160 

12.2 

73 

50 

82 

Braxton.. 

8 

15 

7 

72 

46 

167 

11.5 

75 

50 

84 

Brooke. 

8 

14 

1 

83 

49 

210 

14 

78 

59 

64 

Gilmer. 

8 

16 

1 

73 

49 

158 

12 

66 

54 

92 

Harrison. 

8 

14 

8 

70 

46 

156 

10.4 

71 

34 

66 

Logan. 

8 

14 

8 

82 

48 

188 

13.9 

60 

45 

86 

Marion. 

8 

14 

4 

68 

49 

180 

12.5 

80 

52 

70 

Monroe. 

8 

15 

7 

61 

50 

164 

11.5 

73 

54 

90 

Upshur. 

8 

15 

9 

74 

50 

169 

11.9 

60 

60 

90 

Wetzel. 

8 

14 

5 

70 

55 

150 

12 

80 

52 

78 


When we translate the median point scores of the median pupil of the state 
in the various school subjects and combine them into a single age, we have 
the average achievement age for each grade. By computing the median 
mental age for the various .grades from the mental age grade table, we have 
the following comparison. Dividing the achievement age by the mental age 
we get the achievement quotient for each grade, also shown below. 


Table XIV. Comparison of Mental and Achievement Ages by Grades 



Ill 

IV 

V 

VI 

VII 

VIII 

Achievement Age 

7-5 

8-4 

9-6 

10-8 

11-8 

12-7 

Mental Age 

7-5 

8-5 

9-7 

10-7 

11-7 

12-6 

Achievement Quotient. 

100 

99 

99.1 

100.7 

100.7 

100.6 


The above table reveals perhaps the most striking feature of the entire 
survey, namely, the closeness with which the achievement age agrees with 
the mental age. One could not hope for better evidence of the fact than actual 
achievement as measured by standard tests depends upon mentality. The 
quotients for every grade ,are remarkably close to 100%, indicating that the 
schools are realizing to a considerable degree upon the intelligence of their 
pupils. 




























































CHAPTER IV 


A Study of Class Instruction by Means of Measures of Variability 

In the preceding chapter we had occasion to compare the scores of the 
average or median pupils with the standard scores in the various subjects. 
This comparison enables us merely to see the central tendency; it tells us 
nothing with respect of the range of abilities above and below this median 
score. It is not enough that we know the ability of the average person in our 
class. It is important that we know what the upper and lower fourth, or the 
upper and lower sixth, can do. In order words, we went to know how closely 
our pupils are grouped. This grouping is best studied by what is called measu- 
ures of variability. The measure of variability which we have chosen to use 
is called standard deviation. Technically defined, Standard Deviation, is 
that measure of variability, which, when laid off on each side of the average, 
includes approximately two-thirds of the cases. Hence, by computing the 
standard deviation for any particular class or grade and by adding this to 
the average, we can see the achievement above which one-sixth of the class 
are found, and by subtraction it from the average we can see the achievement 
below which one-sixth of the class are found. In the graphs that follow we 
have attempted to show the range of this middle two-thirds in the various 
subjects. 

Since there are no standards available to show us what we should expect 
as the average range for this portion of the class, we have undertaken to estab¬ 
lish a theoretical standard deviation. More strictly speaking this theoretical 
grouping reveals uniformity of progress and classification rather than an ideal 
standard. By superimposing the graph of the theoretical, or uniform group¬ 
ing, upon a graph showing the actual grouping, we can see how nearly uniform 
the classification of the various grades is. And by studying the span of the 
middle two-thirds when reduced to the common denominator of age, we can 
see at a glance which of our school subjects is best classified. Before presenting 
the graphs for this comparison we shall attempt to explain the method by 
which these graphs were made. We do this with the feeling that the school 
men and women of West Virginia are decidedly in earnest in their efforts to 
study their own conditions and are willing to spend the time and energy neces¬ 
sary in order to understand precisely how this sort of a study is made. The 
process is somewhat technical, but it is the only device known to the writer 
of presenting the actual classification in a subject from grade to grade, and 
comparing it with a classification more uniform and more nearly ideal. Acknowl¬ 
edgement is hereby made to the class in “Scientific Methods of Handling of 
Educational Data,” for the hours of intense work involved in the working out 
of the device which makes this type of study possible. 

Steps in Superimposing a Normal Standard Deviation Graph upon an Actual 

Deviation Graph 

1. Construct an actual Standard Deviation Graph. This is done by (1) 
computing the means of the frequency distributions for each reads; (2) the 
corresponding Standard Deviations, and laying off the Standard Deviations 
on either side of the mean. 


Rural School Survey 


41 


2. Take the difference between the mean of the third and eighth grades 
and divide this difference by five. This gives the average progress each year. 

3. Add the quotient to the mean of the third grade in order to secure the 
theoretical mean for the fourth grade. Add the same quotient to the fourth 
grade mean in order to secure a theoretical fifth grade mean, etc. This estab¬ 
lishes a theoretical mean for each grade indicating the uniform progress we 
should naturally expect. 

4. From the above Standard Deviations compute the corresponding co- 

100 S. D. 

efficients of variabilities. This is done by the Pearson formula Vp =- 

Mean 

and gives us the relative variability. 

5. Divide the sum of these co-efficients by six in order to secure an average 
or uniform variability for each grade. 

6. Using this theoretical variability in each case and the theoretical mean 
for the respective grades, calculate from the above formula the theoretical 
Standard Deviations for the various grades. 

7. Superimposing the theoretical S. D. Curve by laying off the Theoretical 
S. D’s on either side of the theoretical means. 




42 


West Virginia 



Superimpoced upon an Actual Varability 










Rural School Survey 


43 


In the accompaning graphs the dotted lines represent theoretical or uniform 
classification; the continuous lines the actual classification. The variation 
of the curve from the theorectic curve shows how irregularly the pupils are 
grouped or classified. 

A glance at the two Age-Graphs show again that the pupils are more uni- 
formily classified in the mental age distribution. In fact, the theoretical 
mental curve fits the actual so closely that it vindicated the reliability of the 
intelligence tests. 

Studying the grouping by the chronological age by grades, we note that 
the classification is poorest in the third grade, extending beyond the limits 
of the theoretical deviations in both directions. Classification is best in the 
eighth grade, falling within limits of the normal. 

The graphs on the opposite page, which follows, represent a similiar study 
of each of the subjects tested. They are reduced to ages and drawn to scale, 
consequently the grouping of classifications may be directly compared. 



44 


West Virginia 










Rural School Survey 


45 


Arithmetic 

Studying the Arithmetic Graph we see the third grade well grouped, the 
fourth not so well, the fifth still less concentrated, but the sixth, seventh, 
and eighth are about equal to the uniform spread. Especially is the classifi¬ 
cation good in the seventh grade and the eighth grade. 

# 

Rate of Reading 

The graph for the Rate of Reading reveals close grouping in the third grade 
and a gradually increasing range of abilities in succeeding grades until we 
find a very widely distributed group in the seventh and eighth grades, just 
opposite what we found in arithmetic. 

The graph for comprehension shows a decidedly irregular classification. 
In the earlier grades the pupils are especially well grouped, but the sixth and 
seventh grade pupils vary widely in their abilities. The eighth grade shows 
signs of classification. 


Speed of Writing 

Due to insufficient standards we were unable to construct theoretical classi¬ 
fication graph for speed of writing. We may know at once from the dotted 
lines that there is an error in our efforts to interpolate and extend standards. 
However, the actual deviations as indicated by the continuous lines reveal 
very poor classification in the upper grades. The upper sixth has progressed 
rapidly but the lower sixth has made no improvement. This probably tells 
the truth and a truth which is inexcusable. This illustrates the absolute 
necessity of individual attention in teaching hand writing. 

Quality of Writing 

The actual grouping as respects quality is within the theoretical limits. 
The spread or the amount of variation is however rather great as compared 
with some of the other subjects, indicating that the abilities in writing are 
not well classified. 


Spelling 

Spelling shows a more uniform classification than one might suspect from 
looking at the spelling frequency distribution. 





CHAPTER V 


\ 


Studies in Correlations 

One of the most fruitful aspects of Educational Research is found in the 
study of correlations. The data available by means of this survey affords 
abundant material for this type of study. One cannot look at the inidivdual 
records of pupils by the method suggested in the previous chapter without 
noting the agreement or lack of agreement between the scores in different 
subjects. For instance, as we look at a summary sheet page we note the pupils’s 
score in intelligence. If that pupils stands high in intelligence, we naturally 
look to see in which of his school subjects he stands high. In other words, 
we are interested to know how intelligence correlates with the different school 
subjects. If we find by studying the scores of a number of pupils in both 
Intelligence and say Arithmetic, that the pupils who stand high in one stand 
high in another we conclude that there is a close relationship. In order that 
we may know mathematically just how close the relationship is, we compute 
what is known as the coefficient of correlation. This enables us to generalize 
on the entire group correleated. So long as we base our judgments on one 
case here and another there, interpretations are found to differ. For in any 
class of 30 or more pupils, exceptions are sure to occur. But by the Pearson 
formula we can compute a single number which represents the degree of 
relationship that exists in the entire comparison. A perfect relationship or 
correlation is indicated by a plus 1; a perfect negative correlation is indicated 
by a minus 1; a negligible correlarion by 0. If the scores in one subject in¬ 
crease and decrease in another we would secure a negative correlation; if 
increasing scores in one subject were accompanied by permiscuous scores 
in another, we should find a negligible correlation. 

Experts are not always agreed upon the interpretation of these coefficients. 
Dr. Rugg regards a correlation as “negligible” when (r) the symbol for cor¬ 
relation is less than 15 or 20; As “present but low” when r ranges between 
20 and 30; as “marked” when r ranges from 35 to 50; as “high” when above 
60; and 70 is “very high.” By keeping these interpretations in mind we 
shall better understand the results that appear later. 

The first study which we attempted was to study the correlation of intelli¬ 
gence with each of the six aspects of our study. At random we selected five 
classes averaging about 35 or 40 pupils each. By means of Pearson’s Product 
Moment Method formula we computed the correlations in each of the five 
classes. 


Rural School Survey 


47 


Table XV. Showing Correlation of Intelligence 


Intelligence 






Aver. 

Arithmetic 

.58 

.28 

.68 

.33 

.62 

.50 

Rate of Reading 

.21 

.37 

.23 

.22 

.06 

.22 

Comp, of Reading 

.24 

.47 

.59 

.11 

.25 

.33 

Speed of Writing 

.24 

.24 

.25 

.24 

.58 

.31 

Quality 

.09 

.03 

.15 

.41 

.05 

.13 

Spelling 

.26 

.18 

.49 

.30 

.92 

.43 


The table shows considerable irregularity in the different classes. This is 
to be expected. For that reason we computed the relationship in five clgsses; 
it would have been better to have had even more classes. But by the time 
one correlates the various subjects with intelligence and with one another he 
has 21 computations for each class. It involves almost an hour for each corre¬ 
lation. This in part explains why we have not extended the study. 

Looking at the average of the five correlations we see that arithmetic ranks 
highest in its relation to intelligence. This is what Theisen (Director of Ref¬ 
erences and Research, Cleveland), has found. This fact suggests that a pupil’s 
standing in arithmetic should have, as it probably always has had, a good 
deal of influence upon his promotion. It hardly behooves one to boast of his 
inability in mathematics. When r is .50 we are justified in saying that intelli¬ 
gence is an important factor in acquiring arithmetic. Next to arithmetic, 
spelling correlates highest with intelligence; .43 reveals considerable corre¬ 
lation. Comprehension of reading comes next with speed of writing slightly 
lower; .33 and .31 suggests that there is some correlation but not very much. 
It is still less in rate of reading. The outstanding fact in the above table 
is the consistently low correlation in quality of writing. In fact we may say 
it is negligible. This evidence suggests the injustice of holding pupils back 
because they are poor in handwriting or even slow in reading. 

Before concluding just how much influence a single subject should have 
upon a pupil’s promotion we need to see how closely related it is to the other 
subjects. If, for instance, we should find that a subject showed no correlation 
with either intelligence or any other of the school subjects, it would certainly 
argue that that subject should not figure seriously in his promotion or demotion. 
With this in mind we shall proceed to see how the various subjects correlate 
with one another. 


























48 


West Virginia 


Table 16. Showing the Coefficient of Correlations Between the Different 

School Subjects 



Intel¬ 

ligence 

Arith¬ 

metic 

Rate of 
Reading 

Comp, of 
Reading 

Speed of 
Writing 

Quality 
of Writing 

Spelling 

Intelligence 


.50 

.22 

.33 

.31 

.13 

.43 

Arithmetic 

.50 


.10 

.11 

.24 

.11 

.3d 

Rate of Reading 

.22 

.10 


.40 

.27 

.08 

.23 

Comprehension of Reading 

.33 

.11 

.40 


.23 

.08 

.12 

Speed of Writing 

.31 

.24 

.27 

.23 


.14 

.34 

Quality of Writing 

.13 

.11 

.08 

.08 

.14 


.23 

Spelling 

.43 

.30 

.23 

.12 

.34 

.23 



This table contains merely the average of the correlations for five classes 
in the subjects represented. The object of this arrangement is to enable 
one to see how intelligence or any one school subject correlates with each 
of the others. From the first verticle column we see how intelligence corre¬ 
lates with the different subjects. We have just discussed this correlation. 

The second vertical column shows how arithmetic correlates with intelli¬ 
gence and with other subjects. The striking fact revealed here is the extremely 
low correlation that exists between arithmetic and all other subjects. Speed 
of writing and spelling are apparently slightly related to arithmetic. This 
is by no means disconcerting. It only emphasizes the statement above that 
a pupil should not be held back by any one subject, even though it be arith¬ 
metic, because of any great value that arithmetic may be to the other subjects. 

Looking at the next column we find that the rate of reading does not corre¬ 
late hardly at all with any except comprehension of reading, and slightly with 
speed of writing. That rate of reading and comprehension are related was 
found by Gray, Courtis, and other investigators. That our rapid readers 
also comprehend most is quite significant. The next column reveals that 
comprehension bears practically no relation to any other subject than rate. 
Speed of writing shows some correlation with spelling and a little with rate 
of reading. As mentioned before Quality of Writing seems to bear no marked 
relation to any of the other subjects. Spelling shows some correlation with 
speed of writing and arithmetic. 

In general we do not find the different subjects as definitely related as we 
might have supposed. In one way this is encouraging. It suggests that it is 
possible to achieve along one particular line irrespective of thorough prepara¬ 
tion in other subjects. In a sense it increases the responsibility of a teacher 
to see to it that each subject is taught for its own sake and unless it is, there 
is likely to be little advance in it. We cannot expect instruction in one sub¬ 
ject to make up for lack of instruction in another. 

The correlation between school subjects is only one of the possibilities of 
studies in correlations. In our study of other aspects of schools in Coal District, 
we compared the tenure of teachers with the achievement. We found a co¬ 
efficient of correlation of .43 showing that tenure of teachers makes for higher 
achievement. We correlated the school buildings with the achievement in 
education subjects. The buildings were scored by Strayer-Englehardt score 









































Rural School Survey 


49 


card. The achievement of a building was computed as shown in Chapter III. 
When these two scores were correlated we found a correlation of .56. This 
shows rather forcibly that the building has considerable influence upon the 
character of the work done, in it. 

By means of studies of correlation it is hoped that superintendents, prin¬ 
cipals, and teachers will discover not only what subjects are related and are 
helps to one another, but also just how great a factor, health conditions, 
training of teachers, nationality of pupils, etc., are to school progress. By 
such studies we may hope to analyze further the causes for retardation. 



CHAPTER VI 


Delivery of the Survey 

One of the most important phases of the work of a survey is its delivery. 
It is unfortunate that this aspect of measurement is so frequently neglected. 
Many times conscientious and scientific investigators spend a great amount 
of timejon their problems, and as soon as they have satisfied their own curiosity 
in the rpatter, drop the work, seemingly to forget the chief purpose for which 
the investigation was begun. 

Although a school survey may reveal many facts valuable to the expert in 
scientific education and although it may provide training for students of 
educational measurements, we should never lose sight of the fact that the 
chief value of a school survey is to improve the condition of the particular 
pupils who are included in the investigation. 

If this is true, any survey that fails to reflect itself in the reorganization 
and work of the school surveyed, is itself a failure. This means that the results 
must be so handled and presented to the local authorities as to make it possible 
for them to carry out the suggestions which grow out of the investigation. 

In this respect, we have reason to believe that the survey of Type Counties 
of West Virginia is unusually successful. In the first place, the county directors, 
for the most part, were students of the local conditions from the standpoint 
If personal interest. Their special knowledge of local situations enabled 
them to present their findings in a way that would produce the greatest effect 
upon the educational future of that county. There is little question in the 
mind of the writer but that practically every school in the various counties 
has been apprized of its standing in respect to the other schools in the county. 
In fact, we may further say that practically every pupil in every school has 
been apprized of his standing in respect to other pupils of his class and school. 
This survey has reversed the practice of most Educational Surveys, which 
is suggested in the lines from Tennyson, 

“So careful of the type she seems, 

So careless of the single life.” 

The method of reporting this survey, I dare say, is its chief virtue. Con¬ 
cern for the individual pupils has characterized the study. It was planned 
from the outset to keep a record and in duplicate, of the rating of every pupil 
tested in every school subject. In fact, the writer can on a minutes notice 
turn to the individual record of any pupil in any of the ten counties and ascer¬ 
tain how he stands with respect to other members of his class, his district, 
his county, his state, or the standards in any subject tested. 

There is no attempt to disguise the fact that this form of report has taken 
considerable time in organization, and in recording results. But only by 
means of such a record is it possible to follow up the survey from time to 
time and see its ultimate effect. The reader will now see the importance of 
two of the forms devised by the committee on forms which have made individual 
comparisons possible. One of these is the “Summary Sheet” containing the 
name, grade, age, and scores on each subject of each pupil in the class tested; 
the second is the form entitled “Graph by Subject” containing an age-grade 


GRAPH BY SUBJECTS 


Rural School Survey 


51 


table and a graph of each subject with the standards printed in, making it 
possibie for a principal to see at a glance how his school stands with respect 
to the standards m each grade and in each subject. A copy of this form is 
seen on the opposite page. It illustrates the standing of the entire state with 
respect to the standards. These forms make it possible to present the results 
of the survey to pupils and even patron of the school in a form that they can 
clearly see just what the situation is. 





































































































































































































































































52 


West Virginia 


Here again the writer is not familiar with the details of the methods used 
by each county director in delivering the county survey, but the same general 
plan was used by most of the directors that was used in Coal District, which 
is described below. 

Method of Delivering the Survey in Coal District 

1. Public Meeting—Before going to Coal District we prepared copies 
of all summary sheets, graphs by subjects of nineteen of the twenty-one 
schools, and the same record for the district as a whole. We know that the 
curiosity of pupils and patrons was considerably aroused during the week 
in December when we gave the tests. In order to satisfy this curiosity on the 
part of the public, we announced before hand through the schools and by 
newspapers that the results of the survey would be presented at the audi¬ 
torium of the Adamston school building in the evening of March the 9th and 
urged all persons interested in the schools of the district to come out. Some 
three or four hundred people, including pupils, teachers, members of the school 
Board of Education, and patrons were present. At this meeting the various 
members of the staff who surveyed Coal District told briefly the aspect of 
school conditions they had studied, what they had found, and, in the light 
of this investigation, made concrete suggestions as to how these conditions 
might be improved. Miss Breck, of the Home Economics Department of 
West Virginia University, discussed the conditions in home economics, and 
offered definite and practical suggestions for improvement. Professor Ander¬ 
son gave the results of the agricultural survey which Dr. Winkler and he 
made in December. Professor Maclin reported the industrial survey, and 
Superintendent R. C. Smith reported the survey of the building made by 
Superintendent Jackson and himself. The writer assisted by H. D. Lowry, 
Ida B. Smith, Blanch Emery, and Pauline Spangler, reported the results of 
the Educational subjects included in the State Survey. We had previously 
prepared lantern slides of the various tables and graphs containing the results 
of Coal District as a whole and some comparisons between various schools 
in the district. By means of the lantern slides it was comparatively easy 
to explain to the entire audience such details as are contained in the previous 
chapters of this report. It was especially gratifying to see the interest taken 
by the patrons in the results. Many questions were asked, and teachers, and 
patrons engaged in frank, open discussions. 

2. Meeting with Teachers and Principals—Valuable though the general 
meetings are, the direct influence of the survey depends largely upon acquaint¬ 
ing the teachers with the real significance of the results and the precise methods 
to be employed in bettering the prevailing conditions. Too frequently survey 
staffs presume that teachers know how to alter condition when defects are 
pointed out. Many times the teachers fail to understand the proper inter¬ 
pretation to put on results. It is the part of the investigator to explain quite 
fully the significance of the findings and to have a constructive program that 
can be definitely carried out. It is the business of an expert to work out these 
programs and to indicate to superintendents, principals, and teachers, how 
they can be put into operation. 

At any rate it was a problem involving several weeks of intense study on 
the part of the members of the staff to determine upon just what basis it was 



Rural School Survey 


53 


best to attempt to reclassify the pupils and to standardize the work. It was 
easy to see from the wide range of abilities shown in every grade by the fre¬ 
quency distributions that there was need for reclassification, but not so easy 
to decide upon the basis for promotion and demotion assigned to special 
classes. Theoretically we concluded that we should ascertain the achieve¬ 
ment of the middle two-thirds of the class and promote the upper one-sixth 
and mark for special treatment the lower one-sixth. Our real problem was 
to find some standard of achievement which would be more or less uniform 
and yet one that would fit the attainment in Coal District. Three possibilities 
presented themselves. 

1. We might promote all pupils into the next higher grade who were uni- 
formily above the median of that grade indicated by the Illinois Standard. 

2. We might promote all who were above the median for the next higher 
grade according to the standard of the particular school. 

3. Or, finally we might promote on that basis of the median of the district 
as a whole. 

By actually trying out the above methods we learned that the Illinois 
standards were too rigid and too high for our attainments. Applying them 
we had very few promotions. By applying the standards for the immediate 
school we found the medians fluctuated too much, that is, in many cases the 
numbers were small that the standard were not uniform enough and yielded 
many promotions in some grades and few in others. But by applying the 
district standards, we found the medians of the next higher grades cut off 
just about the upper sixth, or the portion we had decided should be promoted. 
Consequently, we decided that the basis of reclassification should be the 
District Medians of the next higher grades for promotions and the median 
of the next lower grade for demotion or for assignment to special classes. 

In presenting this matter to the teachers in Coal District the members of 
the county staff met with all the teachers of the elementary schools of the 
district, called together by the superintendent. We first distributed to each 
teacher a Summary Sheet of her own pupils with their scores in Intelligence, 
Arithmetic, Reading, Writing and Spelling. The following copy is a facsimile 
copy: 




Test given by L. V. Cavins SUMMARY SHEET Computed by H. C Darlington 

School, North View Teacher, Earl McCarty Name of District. Coal County, Harrison 

NOTE: (1) Make three copies, blue for teacher; yellow for county director; white for the University. 

(2) Grade. Ages, Days Attendance for Last Year are to be filled out by teacher 


54 


West Virginia 


Eh 

55 

W 


o 

o 


Spell. 

72 

OO 

1 

'68 

48 

00 

00 

09 

52 

28 

52 

36 

CO 

r-H 

32 

20 

32 

24 

80 

32 


Writing 

Qual. 

45 

30 

30 

40 

35 

40 

30 

40 

25 

30 

35 

30 

35 

25 

35 

40 

35 


Speed 

78 

98 

lO 

O 

T-H 

OO 

CM 

r-H 

r-H 

77 

66 

62 

59 

r-H 

65 

70 

99 

72 

82 

r—H 

OO 

93 


Reading 

Comp. 

CM 

T—1 

O 

r—( 

iO 

r-H 

02 

CM 

r-H 

02 

02 

CO 

02 

r-H 

r-H 


CO 

r-H 


00 

O 

r-H 

CM 

r-H 

ts» 


Rate 

OO 

CO 

r-H 

00 

CO 

r-H 

CO 

02 

T-H 

r^- 

r-H 

r-H 

IO 

rH 

OO 

CO 

r-H 

T* 

1*0 

r-H 

CM 

r-H 

o 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

OO 

r-H 

209 

o 

CO 

r-H 

r-H 

00 

r-H 

CO 

02 

r-H 

oo 

CO 

r-H 

CO 

02 

r-H 


Arith¬ 

metic 

49 

33 

26 

44 

49 

45 

37 

r-H 

CO 

47 

44 

37 

27 

45 

42 

29 

66 

43 


Int. 

Score 

78 

72 

55 

T-H 

CO 

CO 

OO 

46 

33 

34 

79 

58 

40 

53 

42 

Tt< 

CO 

r-H 

r-H 

Tt< 

96 

55 


Days 

Att’d 

Last 

Year 

iO 

r-H 

iO 

r-H 

iO 

r-H 

r-H 

CM 

T* 

r —1 

in 

r-H 

m 

CO 

r-H 

OO 

in 

r-H 

00 

m 

r-H 

r-H 

35 

m 

»n 

r-H 

» 

00 

m 

r-H 

00 

»o 

r-H 

oo 

m 

r-H 

r-H 

CO 

r-H 

»o 

r-H 

CO 

Tfi 

r-H 


Ages 

GO 

o 

s 

OO 

o 

o 

Tt4 

o 

CO 

CM 

o 

rH 

CM 

O 

o 

r-H 

CM 

CM 


. 02 

02 


Yrs. 

r-H 

r—l 

CO 

r-H 

r-H 

CO 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

h* 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r—r 

in 

r-H 

CO 

r-H 

co 

r-H 

CM 

r-H 

TtH 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 


Grade 

CO 



















<L> 

m g 

hP hD 

HH 

Ah ^ 

pP IS 

Ph 5 


pH 

o 

w 

£ 

55 


o 

43 


•g 

c 

o 

PP 


c 

c<3 

a 

OQ 

-+-> 

G 

G 

« 

e3 

a 

o 

43 

E^ 


c3 

G 

c3 

o 

>> 

J- 

G 


oo 

43 

O 

o 

G 

w 

O 


<D 

55 


G 

G 

O 

o 

c3 

G 

bJD 

• 

> 


02 

c3 

£ 

w 

rG 

-♦-» 

G 

Ph 


>> 

02 

G 

G 

02 

W 

G 

03 


rG 

02 

G 

o3 

PH 

G 

c3 


JO 

*"o2 

PP 

>> 

G 

O 

Eh 


I 02 

• r-H 

G, 
02 
02 


O 

o3 

02 

G 

o3 

hP 


02 

44 


02 

O 

>“2 


o 

Q, 

a 

G 


02 

HD 

f~, 

o3 

43 

02 


cq ; 


G 

02 

a 

c3 

o 


Ph 

JO 

G 


G 

03 

G 

• r—« 

G 

c? 

G 

O 

a 

>> 


o3 

tn 

tn 

G 

Q 

-+-> 

02 

02 

G 

u-> 

o3 

w 


o 

G 

O 

02 

CO 

G 

P$ 

02 

44 


02 

02 

>> 

o 

PP 

• 

Q 

2 

o 

c3 

K 


02 

> 

c3 

Q 

G 

O 

02 


o 

55 


CM 


CO 


T* 


m 


CO 


oo 


02 


cm 


co 


Tt< 


iO 



























































































































































































































































































ith Co 


% 










































































































































































































West Virginia 


56 

We next distributed blank cards and directed teachers to place in the middle 
of the card the number of the grade which she taught, and at one end of the 
card put the standards of the District Median for the next higher grade, at 
the other end of the card the medians for the grade below. Thus: 


a> 

a 

m 


<A 

<y 


T3 

<D 

a ) 
a 
c n 


a 

S 

o 

O 


0 d 

U O 

o • rt 
o 

to c3 
C g 
.2 2 
'g * 
S S 


FOR USE IN GRADE 7 


I* 

O ft 

© p 

H S 


a 

o 

3 

•p 

CO 

© 

CO 

a 

£> 

p 


GO 

>0 

CO 


The teachers were then asked to place these cards upon the Summary- 
Sheets and classify her pupils into the three groups. If a pupil were equal 
to or above the median of the next higher grade in intelligence and in a major¬ 
ity of the other educational subjects, he was marked for promotion unless 
the teacher or principal had some good reason for not promoting him. If 
the pupil’s score was less than the median of the grade below, he was not 
demoted, but marked for special attention. All others were left as they were. 

Up until this time many of the teachers and principals were skeptical con¬ 
cerning the value of the tests, especially the intelligence tests, but after study¬ 
ing the results in this way one after another confessed that his faith in tests 
was decidedly strengthened. They were not obliged to take the opinion of 
the investigator, the evidence was before them. In the words of a bystander, 
“The survey put itself over.” 

On the basis of the results of the standard tests the teachers selected from 
the 1675 pupils tested 276 pupils or 16.5%, which is approximately the one- 
sixth originally aimed at, and promoted them the following Monday and 
Tuesday into the next higher grades, giving them a chance to show the remain¬ 
ing two months of school, whether they could do the work or not. At the end 
of the year the writer received a computed report from the various principals 
through the superintendent, indicating how these 276 pupils had fared. The 
report revealed that 269 of the number or approximately 95% had made 




















Rural School Survey 


57 


good, and had been promoted again at the end of the year. The following 
letter from one of the principals is typical of the reports that came directly 
to the writer: 

“The school survey given by the West Virginia University, Depart¬ 
ment of Education, in Coal District, Harrison County, under your 
personal direction, was very much a success in many ways, especially 
in finding pupils that were able to do advanced work. 

“ In the beginning I was somewhat opposed to the test but when the 
results were received and upon finding that in most cases the pupils 
who were promoted were leading their classes, I became convinced 
that the test was just what we were needing for the bright pupils 
and pupils who were able to do advanced work. 

“When our annual promotions were made in all cases but two, 
pupils who were promoted from the results of the test, were also 
promoted again with their new class, showing that their capabilities 
were above the pupils of the other grade.” 

It is probably true, as this letter suggests, that these pupils are more happily 
classified. Each has been saved one year of time. The district has been saved 
$8,508.00, or the cost of 269 pupil-years of teaching. But the greatest gain 
has been the conservation of the abilities of these superior pupils in giving 
them an opportunity to indicate the leadership of which they are capable. 

A third aspect of the delivery of the survey was to meet with the Board of 
Education and present the various recommendations of the Committee, 
such as Home Economics, Agriculture, Industrial Education, Building, and 
other aspects of school conditions. 




CHAPTER VII 


A Study of Rural and City Schools 

One of the studies which the State Department asked us to make was that 
of a comparison of the Rural and City Schools. In our efforts to classify 
schools on the basis of rural and city, we encountered a great many perplexities. 
At the outset we are frank to admit that the comparison is more strictly 
speaking a comparison of schools working under graded and ungraded cond- 
ditions. In general we have included one and two-room schools in the list 
for rural schools and other schools as city. This, of course, is an arbitrary 
division and should be construed to show merely what it does show, namely, 
the school achievement of one and two-room schools as compared with larger 
schools. 

In making such comparison, it was necessary to re-combine all rural pupils 
into one frequency and all city pupils into another frequency. This was done 
by means of the frequency forms entitled “Summary of Ages and Point Scores 
by Frequencies.” Then the various measures of central tendency and varia¬ 
bility were computed. The various point scores have been translated into 
percents of the standard. These percents for the six grades were averaged. 

The following table shows what percent of standard the rural and city 
schools are in the various aspects of our study: 


Rural School Survey 


59 


City 

Intelligence 

Arithmetic 

Rate of 
Reading 

Comprehension 
of Reading 

Speed of 
Writing 

Quality of 
Writing 

Spelling 

»ig. 13. 


Rural 


r ZZZZZZA 

i°°Z 




rzzmnmH 


Showing Comparison by subjects of Rural 
and City Schools. 



























60 


West Virginia 


In respect to intelligence, the rural pupils are only 68% of the standard, 
whereas, the city pupils are 78%. This would lead us to expect the city pupils 
to make a higher percent of achievement in the various school subjects. On 
the contrary, we find the opposite is true. This is one of the most surprising 
revelations contained in the entire investigation. We find the rural pupils 
are ahead in every single subject; 2% ahead in arithmetic, 9% ahead in 
rate of reading, 12% ahead in comprehension of reading, 10% ahead of speed 
of writing, 6% ahead in quality of writing, and 30% ahead in spelling. 

An analysis by grades indicate that the smaller schools are more superior 
than larger schools in the upper grades than in the intermediate grades. This 
adds a further indorsement of the conditions for advancement in the smaller 
schools. The fact that the one and two-room schools, despite their handicaps 
in intelligence and poor start in the third and fourth grades, can surpass the 
city achievement in upper grades at least suggests that the larger schools do 
not have all the advantages. 

| Professor J. B. Shouse, of Marshall College, has made a further analysis 
of this same problem. He has compared 9 one-teacher schools, and 9 two- 
teacher schools, and 6 thre^-teacher schools. The following tables are quoted 
directly from his study: 


Table 17. Comparison of One, Two, and Three-Teacher Schools 

(After Shouse) 

MEDIAN AGES 


GRADES 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

One-Teacher. 

. 9-10 

10-8 

11-10-5 

13-3 

13-8 

15-3 

Two-Teacher. 

. 10-8-5 

11-6 

14-0 

12-10 

13-6 

13-8 

Three-Teacher. 

. 10-5 

11-2 

11-1 

12-9 

13-11 

15-0 


MEDIAN INTELLIGENCE SCORES 







GRADES 




3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

One-Teacher. 

. 24.5 

35.6 

56.7 

62.5 

86.7 

113.3 

Two-Teacher. 

. 29.0 

36.3 

45.7 

48.4 

78.3 

85.0 

Three-Teacher.. 

. 21.1 

36.0 

48.3 

50.0 

66.8 

81.7 


MEDIAN ARITHMETIC SCORES 


GRADES 


3 4 5 6 7 8 

One-Teacher. 10.0 19.1 40.0 45.0 42.5 57 5 

Two-Teacher. 9.1 20.5 34.5 30.6 38.1 40.0 

Three-Teacher. 16.5 21.9 28.3 37.2 41.2 55 0 


MECIAN RATE OF READING 

GRADES 


3 4 5 6 7.8 

One-Teacher. 80.0 115.0 145.0 205.0 175.0 230.0 

Two-Teacher. 78.8 122.5 140.7 168.3 195.0 233.3 

Three-Teacher. 115.0 120.0 135.0 165.0 169.0 207 5 


MEDIAN COMPREHENSION OF READING 

GRADES 


, 4 5 6 7 8 

One-Teacher. 4.2 5.7 8.0 12.5 14.3 17.0 

Two-Teacher. 3.6 6.3 8.9 10.2 12.8 13.5 

Three-Teacher. 3.6 7.7 10.0 9.7 12.1 13 9 

























Rural School Survey 


61 


MEDIAN SPEED OF WRITING 


One-Teacher.. 
Two-Teacher.. 
Three-Teacher. 


Two-Teacher.. 
Two-Teacher.. 
Three-Teacher. 


GRADES 


3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

34.7 

43.1 

64.3 

82.5 

88.3 

82.5 

41.3 

51.3 

75.5 

81.3 

75.8 

97.5 

46.3 

58.9 

64.6 

80.7 

80.6 

95.0 


MEDIAN QUALITY OF WRITING 

GRADES 


3 4 5 6 

25.0 33.1 33.6 43.3 

30.0 31.4 36.4 36.3 

30.4 31.6 38.6 36.9 


7 8 

40.0 49.2 

41.9 37.5 

38.4 42.5 


MEDIAN SPELLING SCORES 


GRADES 


^ _ . 3 4 5 6 7 8 

One-Teacher. 36.8 63.3 93.5 70.0 72.0 94.0 

Two-Teacher. 39.0 75.3 91.3 39.3 81.3 80.0 

Three-Teacher. 48.3 72.0 88.0 58.0 67.3 82 J 


There will be as many explanations for the above results as there are readers 
of this report. The writer hesitates to accept any of the various explanations 
yet offered, because of the lack of evidence that is presented with the inference. 
(1) Some have said that this is due to the fact that rural schools spend more 
time proportionately upon these subjects, but they fail to present the evidence 
proving that the rural schools do spend more time. It is possible to make such 
a study, but our survey did not include it. It would be interesting to know 
the truth in this matter. (2) Others have said the one-room schools have 
better teachers. The general opinion is that the cities have better teachers. 
Again, this matter could be studied with a score card for teachers. It would 
be especially interesting for a few supervisors by concerted effort to make 
a study of this matter. The writer suggests that they use as a means of esti¬ 
mating the teachers the score card devised by Dr. L. B. Hill, of West Vir¬ 
ginia University. (3) The writer thinks that the most likely reason for the 
superior achievement in the rural schools is due to the number of pupils per 
teacher, and the correspondingly smaller number of pupils in each class in 
the rural schools. Proceeding upon this inference he attempted to study the 
ratio existing between teacher and pupils in rural and city schools. Due to 
the fact that the enrollment of the first and second grades were not reported 
by various county directors, he was compelled to abridge facts with esti¬ 
mates. To this extent the results are not reliable and consequently unsatis¬ 
factory. As nearly as we can get at this enrollment, using the enrollments as 
reported and abridging them by Ayers ratio of enrollment by grades taken 
from 386 cities, we find that rural teacher has an average enrollment of 15.8 
pupils, and the city teacher an enrollment of 25.6 pupils. 

While the number of pupils is not so very much smaller per teacher in 
rural schools, the difference is such as to give the rural teacher a chance to 
become more intimately acquainted with her pupils and enables her to hold 
them to a more strict account. 

Mr. Hastings, County Superintendent of Monongalia County, finds that 
by actual count the one-room schools of his county have an average enroll¬ 
ment of 28 pupils, his grade schools have an average of 37 pupils. The actual 
attendance average is 20.8 in the rural as compared to 29.6 in the graded 
schools. Mr. Hastings finds that the graded schools graduate from their 


















62 West Virginia 


eight grades a large percent of their enrollment. He finds, too, that the attend¬ 
ance in graded schools is better. Attendance in one-room rural schools averages 
75% of enrollment; the graded schools average 80% of enrollment. The 
surprising thing is that these indexes of better schools do not reflect them¬ 
selves in the achievement. In a sense the fact that more pupils drop out of 
the rural schools in the upper grades explains the higher scores in these grades. 
Those that remain are generally the better students and consequently the 
median scores would be higher than they would have been had they all re¬ 
mained. Until the facts are further analyzed it does not seem to the writer 
that the superior attainment of the rural pupils as shown in the survey can 
be interpreted as evidence for or against consolidation. County superin¬ 
tendents and district supervisors should assist the University and State 
Department in a further study of this situation and find the exact cause of 
the rural superior achievement. 

The city schools are hereby challenged to show that their attainments in 
other lines are sufficient to offset the lead of the rural school in the subjects 
tested by this survey. 


Studies of Variability 

It is not until we come to study the progress of the group as a whole and 
note the classification as revealed by measures of variability that we can 
make a final statement regarding the achievement of rural and city schools. 
In order to study the grouping or classification we computed the standard 
deviation of each subject in each grade of both Rural and City schools. We 
then took an average of the six variabilities of the six different grades as an 
index of the variability in the different items of the survey. The following 
table shows this comparison: 


Table 18. Showing a Comparison of the Average Standard Deviation of 

Rural and City Schools 



Age 

Ment. 

Age 

Arith¬ 

metic 

Rate of 
Reading 

Comp. 

Reading 

Speed of 
Writing 

Quality of 
Writing 

Spelling 

Rural 

1.75 

1.77 

15.1 

46.6 

3.15 

20.4 

11.9 

22.9 

City 

1.5 

1.5 

11.6 

46.6 

3.15 

15.8 

9.8 

24.7 


The above table clearly reveals that the city schools are better classified. 
The standard deviations are not so large. They are as good or better in every¬ 
thing except spelling. The rural schools are apparently giving more attention 
to this subject than the city. It is striking that the two groups are the same 
in rate and comprehension of reading. In arithmetic and in writing there 
is evidence of considerable effort toward classification in the city schools 
though the range is still wide enough, it is considerably better in the rural 
school. 

On the whole we may conclude then that the rural schools are ahead in 
practically all school subjects if judged by the achievement of the average 
pupil, but the classification of the pupils of the city schools is considerably 
better. 



















CHAPTER VIII 


Effect of Supervision 

Another question which the State Department desired us to study was the 
effect of district supervision. This study was attempted in much the same 
way as the comparison of City and Rural schools. All of the results of the 
districts having supervision were thrown together into one frequency dis¬ 
tribution, the results of the districts not having a district supervisor were 
placed in another frequency distribution. The various computations incident 
to the previous study were made and reduced to percentages of the standard. 
The graph on the opposite page shows the relative standing of the two groups 
as compared with the standards. 



Rate ©f Reeding 


Comprehension 
of Reading 


Speed of 
Writing 


Quality of 
Writing 



Spelling 


Tmnm 


Supervised 


Hon-supervisedEZS 23 


Fig. 14. Showing the Comparison of Supervised and 
Hon* supervised Groups. 




















64 


West Virginia 


The non-supervised pupils are older chronologically, leading us to expect a 
correspondingly higher showing in the school subjects. On the other hand, 
the supervised pupils are older mentally, leading us to expect a higher educa¬ 
tional achievement of the supervised pupils. By examination the various 
subjects we shall expect to see in which ones supervision seems most effective. 
We do not see any very striking evidence of supervision in any one subject. 
The achievement is slightly more in arithmetic, rate of reading, comprehen¬ 
sion of reading, and speed of writing. The unsupervised pupils seem to be 
slightly ahead of the others in quality of writing and considerably ahead 
in spelling. One might infer that because of the lack of supervision, the 
unsupervised were devoting an undue amount of time to these subjects. 
However, this is only an inference and unsupported by any statistical study 
of study program, such as would be necessary to establish it as a cause for the 
higher scores. In general we are forced to conclude that with respect to 
measures of central tendency the effect of supervision is not very noticeable, 
the superiority is scarcely more than one would expect from the superior 
mentality of the supervised group. 

Before we conclude that supervision is not effective we must study then the 
median achievement. We must study the attainment of the group as a whole, 
this involves a study of the classification of pupils by measures of variability. 
This comparison was made by computing the standard deviation for the 
sixth grade distribution in both groups for each subject. The following graph 
shows our results: 



Rural School Survey 


65 



Mental flge 


7 /777777// //77A 


/5.S3 


Rr'rlhnnetic, 



47.05 


7?a+e of 
'Re.ad/n q 




Comprehension 
o/ 'Reading 




Speed of 
W rrbinq 



Z8.3I 
3 7.94 


Q uality of 
Writing 




Spelling 



52.9/ 

50.33 


Coefficient of Variability of 6 — Grade of Wesf Va. 
Comparison of Supervised and Non-Supervtsed . 
5 upnrvised mZTA Non-Supervised mm 

















66 


West Virginia 


The accompanying graph differs from the variability graphs in Chapter IV 
in that standard deviations, which represent absolute variabilities, are reduced 
to coefficients of variability which are measures of relative variability. Since 
our point scores are different we cannot make a direct comparison, between 
measures of standard deviation. For an example, standard deviations, 2 S. D. 
for age is 1.43 years, S. D. for arithmetic is 14.45 problems, S. D. for rate 
of reading is 47.9 words. But by reducing S. D. to a coefficient of variability 

S. D. 100, 

which we do by the Pearson formula Vp =-we can then make 

M 

direct comparisons. 

The bars in this graph represent the relative spread of the middle two- 
thirds of the pupils of the sixth grade. The shorter the bars the better the 
classification. Both supervised and non-supervised schools reveal very poor 
classification. This is especially true of arithmetic and spelling. There 
is almost no evidence of standardization whatever in these subjects. With 
such a wide range in the achievement of the middle two-thirds of the grade 
we can but wonder how far the upper sixth is above the lower sixth. Here 
again we see the importance of a more mobile system of classification. To 
hold this upper sixth to a pace set by even the average is to dissipate their 
efforts and blast their ambitions. 

When we compare the supervised group with the non-supervised we may 
conclude that supervision is functioning considerably in arithmetic, also in 
• speed of writing, to some extent in quality, but failing in rate and compre¬ 
hension of reading and spelling. On the whole the variability of the super¬ 
vised group is more uniform. 


Supervised 

34.55 

31.61 

31.92 

28.31 

26.08 

52.91 

Non-supervised 

47.05 

26.83 

29.12 

37.94 

28.43 

50.33 


It is interesting to note that in both groups the variability in mental ages 
is greater than in chronological ages, thereby indicating that there is a tendency 
to classify pupils by their chronological ages rather than by their mental 
ability. Our comparison with achievement ages shares that this is not cor¬ 
rect, for we founil that achievement parallels mental and not chronological age. 

Whether we study the average attainment or the classification of pupils 
we see only a slight improvement in districts that have supervision. This 
leads us to inquire, to what extent may these districts be said to have super¬ 
vision ? Superintendent Bliss in his book entitled “Methods and Standards 
fcr Local School Surveys” cites the median ratio existing between supervisors 
and teachers to be 12.9 and the median ratio between supervisors and pupils 
as 475. If these ratios are what we should expect in order to secure adequate 
supervision, I think we may at once conclude that we have at least a plausible 
explanation for the small showing, made by supervision. The writer is under 
the impression that in the strict sense of the word the supervisor in this district 
is entirely inadequate. Take for example, Coal District. The district super¬ 
visor has twenty-one separate schools, containing over one hundred teachers, 
and over 3200 pupils to supervise. One can readily see how with the great 
amount of detail envolved in attendance records, looking after text books, 
supplies, physical equipment, etc., that the supervisor has little time for 
















Rural School Survey 


67 


real supervision. Most of the supervisors that the writer has had occasion to 
talk to, frankly admit that their opportunity for real class room supervision 
is decidedly limited. 

This situation should seriously challenge the thought of every educator in 
the State of West Virginia. Robert Clarke, of the Teacher Training Depart¬ 
ment, pointed out that during the year of 1921-22, 4800 of the 10,600 ele¬ 
mentary school teachers of the state were less than high school freshmen in' 
their educational preparation. This reveals the startling fact that these 4800 
teachers are not only untrained, but uneducated. While this is rapidiy chang¬ 
ing, some 7000 teachers are in summer schools this summer, yet for years to 
come it is clear that a large percent of our children will be in the hands of 
these uneducated and untrained teachers. The importance of adequate 
supervision is hereby forced upon our attention. The only hope for even a 
reasonable achievement from these untrained teachers is to have close and 
able supervision. 

By supervision we do not mean vigilent inspection. Ideals of supervision 
must undergo a radical change if we are to bring our schools up to standard. 
Our supervisors must be trained. Experience in school work is not always 
training in supervision. We should have a much higher standard for our 
supervisors than for our high school teachers. Salaries should be sufficient 
to attract trained men and women into the special field of supervision. Super¬ 
visor certificates should be required of all candidates and issued sparingly. 

In this connection then, we wish to call attention to a small book entitled 
“The Value of School Supervision” by Pittman, published by Warwick and 
York, Baltimore. This book reports an experiment which Mr. Pittman has 
carried out. He calls it the Zone Plan of Supervision, which he defines as 
follows: “A plan of supervision in which the supervisor divides his entire 
supervisory district into territorial units, each of which serves as the terri¬ 
torial limits, for one week of supervisory effort has been designated by the 
writer as the Zone Plan. The purpose back of such territorial organization is 
to provide for systematic supervision of classroom instruction, for convenient, 
effective, and democratic teacher meetings, and for the development of a 
community consciousness on the part of rural communities with a view to 
inspiring and facilitating more effective social, educational and commercial 
action.” 

One of the distinct features of Professor Pittman’s plan was a definite 
calendar, as detailed as a university calendar made out in advance for the 
entire year. With one exception the calendar was carried out exactly. The 
experiment consisted of measuring the results of two similar groups of schools, 
one supervised, the other not supervised. A postion of the calendar follows: 

“Sept. 28th to Oct. 10th—Initial survey of the experimental and central 

groups of schools. 

“Sept. 27th to Nov. 1st—First supervisory tour. Improvement in the speed 
and comprehension of reading.” 

Seven such supervisory tours were made, and as many teachers meeting 
of small groups of teachers. Demonstration lessons and reports of various 
methods of teaching were prominent in these meetings. 

At the end of the year the unsupervised groups were tested and it was 
found that the supervised group showed an improvement of 194% over the 
unsupervised group. That is, the experimental group did 194% as much 





68 


West Virginia 


as did the control group in the same length of time. In addition to the im¬ 
provement made by pupils, the teachers of the experimental group had read 
an average of 8.6 books during the session, while the teachers of the control 
group had read an average of 2 books. Teachers of the former group had 
attended an average of 6.1 teacher meetings while the teachers in the latter 
group attended an average of two, both of which had been required by law. 

From these and other results of the experiment Mr. Pittman concludes, 
“The foregoing data shows that supervision practically doubled the efficiency 
of the school for more than half of the school subjects and in doing that it did 
not decrease the efficiency in the other half of the school work. The obliga¬ 
tions for the American school system, which these results imply, are clear. 
For supervisors not to be supplied is unfair to the taxpayers who provide the 
funds with which the schools are maintained. It is a waste of the time and 
intelligence of the teachers for them to have the inspiration to professional 
growth which supervision gives. The greatest of all losses accrues to the 
children who might be advancing twice as rapidly and possibly with much 
more joy if provided with the right sort of supervision.” 



Rural School Survey 


69 


H 

55 

W 

S 

g 


>> 

+3 

g 

P 



. 

D 







































C 

• 

• 

• 


Spell. 





































I 

J 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

D 


bo 

.S 

*-♦3 

Qual. 
















# 





















a? 

ft 

a 

o 

O 


£ 

Speed 







































• >> 

• -*-3 

bD 

G 

• M 

H3 

% 

Comp. 


























. 











c 

t ] 

x c 

i. 1 

. • Fi 

3 G . 

3 h v. 

5 ' o> 

J <d-G 

G o 

c3 

CD 

Ph 

Rate 





































co c 

1 ! 
E * 

* •— G 

s C3 

? ^ CD 

) -w 

i o . 

^ >» 

3 <D-° 

r -4-3 -+3 

^ 2 

Arith- 

metic 





































2 

ZD 

CO 

0 

T3 

a> 

Is 

-4-3 

G 

►—i 

Score 



























\ 












T3 O 

-43 

§ s 

8 3 

<d 

Days 

Att’d 

Last 

Year 







































£> CO 

;2f3 

Ages 

Mos. 







































a> u* 

>> o 
<*■* 

tr g 

2 g 

i3 <3 

c3 ^ 
o G 

-4-i CD 

*2«! 

Yrs. 



























V 











t- 

<D 

o 

Grade 





































>> 

rft 

g 

o 

> 

s 

H 

NOTE: Make three copies, blue i 
(2) Grade, Ages, Days 

NAME OF PUPILS 

(Begin with the third grade) 









'i 

0 





i 

i 

j 


















/ 




o 

-4-3 

s 

H 

School. 

- 

No. 










































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































COMPARISON OF SCHOOL AND STANDARD MEDIANS 


70 


West Virginia 


i 


>> 

e 

p 

o 

O 


o 

U-. 

-4-3 

CO 


O 

<D 

S 

c3 


<L> 

O 

C3 

a? 


O 

o 

o 

02 


NOTE: Make three copies, blue for teacher; yellow for county director; white for the University. 

COMMENT 







GRADES % 

% 

VIII 

















> 


1 



% 












►—1 
> 



\ 










* 




> 

















> 
►—1 

















>—1 
►—( 

►—1 

















• 

Medians 

Standard 

School 

Standard 

School 

Standard 

School 

Standard 

School 

Standard 

School 

Standard 

School 

Standard 

School 

Standard 

School 

ITEMS COMPARED 

Ages 

Intelligence 

Arithmetic 

Rate 

xivauiug / 

Comprehension 

T3 

O 

<D 

Q. 

CQ 

t 

Quality 

Spelling 



Tests given by. Computed by... 

Address... Address 






















































































































































« 


Rural School Survey 7i 


• ' • ! 



\ 


» 


* 





































































































































































































































































































































WEST VIRGINIA SURVEY 





West Virginia 


to 

o 


CD 
3 
cr 

CD 


>» 

X) 

C/5 

CD 

u. 

O 

o 

</5 


O 

CL 

•o 

c 

c/5 

0 

cr. 

< 

O 

*>^ 

(— 

cr. 

E 

E 

3 

tt> 


Q 


Ph 

P 

& £ 

l'—t M 

P Q 


PS 

o 

H 

O 

W 

PS 


E-» 

55 

P 

O 

O 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 



T3 

t- 




















• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 



CO 

i 




















• 





Tf 

TtH 





Tt< 




Tf 


s 








• 






r-H 

CM 

CO 


AO 

CD 


OO 

05 

O 

r-H 

CO 






• 

H 

• 


pj 

<D 











r-H 

r-H 

1 

AO 

r-H 

1 

AO 

r-H 






• 

Ph 

• 


• ^ 
o 

o 

1 

o 

1 

ao 

1 

ao 

1 

AO 

1 

ao 

»o 

1 

ao 

1 

ao 

AO 

1 

AO 

1 

AO 

AO 







P 

• 


P 

CD 



r-H 

CM 

CO 

rjl 

AO 

CD 


OO 

05 

o 

r-H 

CM 






• 

CQ 

• 


CO 












r-H 

r-H 

r-H 






• 

CO 























>1 


CO 




r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

T-H 

r-H 

r-H 





ca 

Eh 

15 

Eh 

55 

W 

P5 

• 

13 

-+-> 

c 

OQ 

CD 

bf 

<2 

rH 

1 

»o 

r-H 

1 

CD 

r-H 

r-H 

00 

r-H 

1 

05 

r-H 

i 

r-H 

1 

r-H 

r-H 

1 

CM 

r-H 

J 

CO 

r-H 

1 

T* 

r-H 

1 

AO 

r-H 

1 

CD 

r-H 

rU 

r-H 

1 

OO 

_• 

"3 

B 

'U 

b 

a 

13 

c3 
• ^ 

P 

O 

P 

O 

Q 

Q 


(D 

S 

! 

AO 

1 

CD 

*L 

oi, 

1 

05 

r-H 

r-H 

1 

r-H 

r-H 

1 

CM 

r-H 

1 

CO 

r-H 

1 

r-H 

1 

AO 

r-H 

ci 

r-H 

1 

r-H 

1 

oo 

o 

C 

o 

55 

CD 

PS 

c 

E- 

<D 

O 

O 

< 









r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 

r-H 







W 

P 

CO 

< 

H 

P 

Q 

< 

PS 

O 

W 

o 

< 

p 

< 

H 

55 

p 

S 


e® 

-+H 

C 

H 


P 

H-* 

CO 


P 

t >- 


P 

H-a 

CD 


p 

-+-» 

*o 


P 

-*n 

Tf 


w 

p 

P2 

<d 

Eh 

W 

Q 

PS 

o 

I 

p 

o 

<2 


c3 

-*n 

O 

Eh 


p 

— 

CO 


p 

-*-< 


P 

W 

CD 


P 

-*-> 

ao 


p 


t- 

CO 


fcfl 

< 


I 

»o 


AO 


ci 


CD 


tl 


oo 


oo 


da 

d> 




CM 

r—( 

I 

CM 


I 

CO 

hH 

! 

CO 


I 




iO 

r-H 

I 

to 


J> 


CD 


ti 


OO 


oo 


<D 

CD 

CD 

< 


c3 

a 

o 

15 


t- 

c3 

CD 

pH 


c3 

h^> 

O 

Eh 


O 

c3 

• 

HD 

CD 



























































































































































































































































































































































































INTELLIGENCE ARITHMETIC 




Rural School Survey 


-t-3 

00 


-t-> 

is* 


CO 


-t-3 

tO 


-*3> 


CO 


o 

t- 

o 

o 

02 

-4-3 

a 
• *—« 
o 

Ph 


CM 


o 

CM 


05 rh 

^iHOOC5rt<Ci'^05Tt<C5'^C5'^Ci^OrttO^C5Tj< 
riOiC500GONNOOiO>0'^T^COCOC^(M»HTH 

iO O to O icoJsiioiiiiiio^oiJsiioo 

THrHOO0i0500XNNOc0»0»0^'«tC0C0(NClHH 

H^HH 


to 


*-1 

d> 


?T 

to o 


c$ 

•+-* 

o 

Eh 


c 

c3 
• ^ 

T 3 

<D 


-to 

oo 




























-1-3 





























-a 

-t-3 

O 




























■4^ 

to 





























J=J 

-+3 


T3 

t-r 

CO 


<D 

i-i 

o 

O 

02 


O 

Ph 


05 

05 

05 

05 05 

05 

05 


ec 

CM 

—1 o 

05 

OO 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM CM 

r-H 

t-H 


I 

O 

1 

O 


I 

o 

1 

o 


CO 

CM 

*-« o 

05 

oo 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM CM 

T—1 

r-H 


NcDio^co(N'H005C5C5050ja>030305 

rlWriHiHHHt-lOOONCOlO^COC^rHCJ 

oooociooioooooooooo 

NOtOr^COdTHOOlOONOiO^COClTH 


-2 

o 

H 


c 

c 3 

• ^ 

T 3 


t 

























































































































































































































































































































































































RATE OF READING COMPREHENSION OF READING 


West Virginia 


t 


42 

00 


42 

-4-3 


42 

-4^> 

CO 


42 

-4-3 

*0 


42 

-4-3 


"T3 

CO 


o 

t- 

o 

o 

CG 

H-3 

$2 

• 

o 

PH 


iO^CO<NrHOO:OCNO»OT^CO(N 
CM CM CM CM CM CM r—i r-H 1—1 r—i t— 1 t-H r— 1 r*H 


HOOOONOLCitCONH 


03 

-4-3 

O 

H 


c 

03 
• *—« 

T3 

CD 


42 

-4-3 

00 




























42 

h-3 




























42 

-4-3 

O 




























42 

-4-3 




























42 

-4-3 





























S-. 

co 


o 

t- 

o 

o 

CO 

H-3 

c 

'o 

pH 


05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 

^COCMi—'00500r^*CO»0'^fCOCMi—100505050505050: 
CKNCSKN<MiHrHiHTHiHiHi-MHrtiH0500NCO»CrJlCC 

oooooooooioiiiioAooooc 

Tjieo<NrHOOiOONCDiOTtiCO(NiH005XNCOiOr}iCC 
CM CM CM CM CM *“H 1 -H r —1 r —1 r—i r—1 r —1 r —1 i —1 r-H 


05 05 

CM r—i 05 


o o o 

Total 

CM r-H 


Median 




























































































































































































































































































































































































SPEED OF WRITING QUALITY OF WRITING 


Rural School Survey 


75 




-O 

- 4-3 

oc 




























^3 

- 4-3 

ts. 





























-4-3 

CO 


^3 


4th 




























3rd 








* 





















m 

o 

t-< 

O 

o 

02 

-M 

o 

p-l 


rf< 05 ^ Oi ^ 


CM 

r—t 

o 

CM 




rH0005'^0'^C5Tt<C5Tf<05rt<C5'^C^ , rt<aiTf05Th 
’HrHMpO500 00NNcDcOiOiC^r^COCCiWCq»-rHO3rJ< 
llllllllllllllllllll 
0i00ifl0i00w50i00»ccn00»00i0 0i00«0 
^<OOC5C5(X)OONNOO»OiOrt<^COCOW(MTHiH 


C3 

-*3 

O 

H 


a 

cS 

• r-^ 

T3 

V 


M 

oo 



























* 

-4-3 




























*c3 

-4^ 

cO 





























*0 


-4-3 


— 

CO 



ro 

o 

— 

o 

o 

CO 


o 

Ph 


05 05 Tf __ ^ 

OOC5T^C5^Q^C5 

O 05 oo oo t>- o 

OlOO *0 © 1C 


CM 

t-H 

CM 


I 

*a 


*—i 

i 


^05-rt'05^05Tt<05Tt*05Tt< 


io »o 


CO CO CM CM 


05 


I I 

SoOOOOOXNNOOiOO’^'^COWCiClH 


»o 


TTtttt mi 

0»OOW20iOO«3 0iOO»C 


2 J 


c3 

-4-3 

o 

H 




/ 


Median. 

























































































































































































































































































































































































SPELLING REMARKS 


76 


West Virginia 


i 


o 

03 

d 

bO 
• ^ 
03 

M 

£ 

o-a 

02 r-G 

0 ? o 

03 


03 

t- 


^■£.2 

w 2 ~ 


o 

o 


C mT 3 
o 03 CJ 
w HH> .G 


02 

• M 

> 

r~i. 

CD 

C- 

G 

m 




b£« 

G.S 

5 O 

o m 

CO 


M 

CD 

-w 

g 


*o O •• 
0) t> 

a o 2 

a)^ 5 

.G o3,G 
o 
G 
ca 


-+-3 

o 


£ 

jd 

<D 


CD O 

‘s 

03 
G > 
Q-J 3 


£X 3 
O 3 

bp^ 

■*— J G . 

02 • r-« X3 

S-- S- 

►— 1 bO w 3 
-*-3 (-< -*-> c 3 

. ~ ^ 02 
S-rf 


_ G 

. 2.5 


o 

CD JO 
CL CS 

co^a 

-*j G 

sr 


g -2 bO 
.2 03 b£) 


G > 

02 O _ 
. —• . —. 02 

Q *i 5 
53 ^ 
> 


u, O 

a - cd -rs 

G 
O 
o 


8 


t- 

c 3 


G 

O 

>> 


° ci 


T3 

G 


£ 3 
O. OQ 


02 

- 

c3X5 g o 

-S c fi 5 S 

2 >,*“•- a 2 

Cj fi O O Q) h 

M^QQOfe 


JD 

3 

c3 

J3 

13 

> 

CD 

X3 


G 

O 

£ 


ju 

o 

cu 

CD 

Ut 

03 

_ G 3 

&— -i_> 

-♦-3 

*G bP 

a g 

G3 ^ 
* G 
c3 £ 
^ Pi 

03 03 
dG 03 
^ G 

a.s 

02_ 

Si 

o — 

>» 03 

Grf 

H -*-» 
<!o 2 


* 


Jd 

-*^> 

oo 


Jd 


jd 

CO 


rG 

iO 


G3 

-f-< 


X3 

t-> 

CO 


s 

t- 

o 

o 

C£ 


o 

pH 


00 (NOOTHOGWOO^OCO(NOO^OG(MOOT}iOcD(MOOTt <0 

OO20200 00 00NNGC0C0»0i0rftT}CT}iC0C0(M(NClrHr-i 


4 


P 

G 
• *** 

T 3 

03 


H S 










































































































































































































Rural School Survey 


77 


RECOMMENDATIONS 

In view of the various studies herein contained, we herewith make the 
following recommendations to the State Department of Schools: 

1. That the “Survey of Type Counties” be extended to include all counties 
in the state. 

2. That county superintendents, city superintendents and principals, 

district and city supervisors, and all other administrative agents be urged 
to acquaint themselves with this type of work sufficiently to make an accurate 
survey. „ ■ ' ■ V .* . • v- 

3. That the schools of the state be standardized upon the basis of reclassi¬ 
fication used in Coal District (Page 00) namely, that pupils be promoted 
when they are equal to or superior to the median scores in intelligence and 
the principal school subjects of the next higher grade according to the local 
district standard. 

4. That the classification be further improved by making the semester, 
or quarter wherever possible, instead of the year the unit of promotion. 

5. That pupils three years or more retarded be assigned to special teachers. 

6. That accelerated pupils be given equal opportunity by means of “fur¬ 
thering classes” that will abridge the essentials missed by the irregular pro¬ 
motions. 

7. That all school buildings be rigidly scored by the state department 
score card and that all buildings that fall below 50% of a perfect score be 
replaced by new buildings or the pupils sent to a consolidated school. 

8. That supervision be extended and decidedly intensified by urging super¬ 
visors to prepare supervising schedules for months in advance similar to the 
one proposed by Professor Pittman in his zone plan described in his book 
entitled, “The Value of Supervision.” 

9. That the reports upon the above recommended investigations be sent 
at stated times to the proper representatives of the state department as desig¬ 
nated by the state superintendent of schools. 

10. That teachers and supervisors be requested to secure copies of the 
“School Survey of Type Counties of West Virginia,” and familiarize them¬ 
selves sufficiently enough with its contents to make co-operation in all phases 
of school work possible. 




























» 


f .a 









>» 





.fi 


? .vr A 




■ 




»’* > 




- HP 


A 




















■■■ * 






\ # yi . !v*i 









LIBRPRY OF CONGRESS 



0 022 126 004 1 










































